On 01-Oct-22 07:10, John C Klensin wrote:
--On Friday, September 30, 2022 13:26 -0400 Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
(Side comment - why can the various boards have various levels of executive session, but this wasn't contemplated for the Nomcom?)
All NomCom meetings are executive sessions, since they are bound by the rule of strict confidentiality. A meeting that excluded the liaisons would be unacceptable, IMHO, since one of the liaisons' duties is to witness the process. A session from which the liaisons were excluded would raise an intense suspicion of horse-trading. I find the idea that *any* of the confidential material should be concealed from the liaisons quite disturbing, for the same reason. How can a liaison audit the process and assert that it was followed correctly if they have not seen all the material? If a candidate is concerned that one of the liaisons might be prejudiced against them or that there is a conflict of interest (e.g. the candidate and the liaison have the same employer), is this worse than the same situation between a candidate and a voting NomCom member or the NomCom chair? We rely on personal integrity for such cases, because we have no choice. (RFC 8713 doesn't seem to mention recusal for such cases.) Brian
