> From: kent crispin [mailto:kent@xxxxxxxxx] > On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 04:03:02PM -0700, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote: > > > > > > > I also believe the nomcom process does provide > > > accountability. I think that the nomcom interview process > > > was more comprehensive than any job interview process I've > > > gone through. > > > > I think you make a fundamental error here, accountability is > > determined by whether we can get rid of someone, not by how > they are > > appointed in the first place. > > Oh. Therefore voting has nothing to do with accountability, > since it is a > mechanism for selecting people in the first place, and therefore the > premise of this thread is vacuous. No, it is the fact that there will be a vote in the future that creates accountability. That is why electing Presidents for life is never democratic, however good the voting process it is never repeated. It is also why a single flawed election is not catastrophic for the system, it does not indicate a systemic failure of the system, there will be another election in the future. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf