Re: Re: Complaining about ADs to Nomcom (Re: Voting (again))

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jari,

I agree with you on this point.  I've tossed my hat into nomcom a few times, but I would have either reconsidered or would have been more active had I known the other candidates.  Additionally, I could have given feedback on candidates had I known that they were candidates.  

NOMCOM has been good about soliciting feedback, but I still think that we miss out on useful feedback because IETF members cannot reliably say who is a candidate and who is not.  Some candidates have sent around BCC: mails, from time-to-time, saying that they are a candidate & would appreciate folks to send comments to NOMCOM.  This doesn't seem like a good way for getting information 'public.'

In the absence of facts, there are lots of rumors about whether a specific IESG / IAB member is stepping down or not; reasons why; etc.  This doesn't seem to be an optimal process, IMO.


> 
> From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 2005/04/27 Wed PM 01:59:38 EEST
> To: ldondeti@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> CC: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@xxxxxxx>,  ietf@xxxxxxxx, 
> 	Dave Crocker <dcrocker@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Complaining about ADs to Nomcom (Re: Voting (again))
> 
> 
> Hi Lakshminath,
> 
> > As the title indicates, it is not sufficient to just complain about an 
> > AD (I guess it might be sufficient in the "Recall" process), it is 
> > also necessary to provide a pool of, or just one for that matter, 
> > candidates who are interested and qualified.  Yes, I have real 
> > examples.  (May I suggest that Nomcom procedures be revised to make 
> > the final candidate list, or at least the number of interested 
> > candidates for each position, be made public?)
> 
> I like this suggestion. But first: I'd rather call this thread "feedback"
> than "complaining", because I hope the nomcom gets a lot of input
> and not just when someone is doing badly.
> 
> But back to the suggestion. I have beeing trying to send a lot of
> input on various positions and candidates to the nomcom in recent
> years. But from the point of view of a regular IETF participant this
> isn't always easy. Basically, the problem is that we have a lot of
> input to give you, but we lack the data about the candidates!
> 
> Of course, we can easily give you feedback on the current AD.
> But we've had a large number of people leave the IAB and IESG
> recently, and it isn't easy to provide feedback about potential
> candidates. Sometimes I tried to do that, just to be surprised that
> the people I commented on weren't even running or someone
> I didn't know or didn't consider as a potential candidate was in
> the process. The nomcom goes out to the area chairs and other
> contributors and solicits feedback, revealing at least some of
> the potential candidate names. This helps, but its fairly limited.
> Or at least I would have wanted to give more feedback on more
> areas than I received questions from the nomcom.
> 
> I would suggest that (agreeing) candidate lists be made public
> early in the process, in order to make it easier for the IETFers to
> provide you feedback. This would also increase the transparency
> of the process. And yes, I am aware of the argument that some
> candidates might be shy to reveal that they are running for the
> job. But we are a major organization, and I would suggest that
> the benefits for the organization outweigh benefits (if any) for
> the candidates.
> 
> --Jari
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@xxxxxxxx
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]