And it does currently agree to some degree.
The question is whether publishing the list would actually cause a significant increase in that behavior. If we conclude that publishing would indeed result in such an increase, then that is a good reason to not publish the list of candidates.
But given that electioneering already goes on, and that the feedback the nomcom receives is somewhat affected by the question of who can manage to discern the candidates from the leaky information flow, I am doubtful as to whether it would result in a significant increase.
Yours, Joel M. Halpern
At 01:33 PM 5/8/2005, Geoff Huston wrote:
And there is some risk (small, I think) of people pushing others to endorse them. This would seem easier with a public list, because the nomcom is not left wondering why they got the supportive email.
A risk not without quite extensive precedent over the years, and the concept of overt electioneering is one that personally I find a strange perversion of an already somewhat strange process. Are we after the the judgement of a few as to the best qualified individual for the role, or the one who is seen as being the "most popular" on the basis of a concerted campaign of electioneering? What is this body again? What is its purpose? Why does it exist? etc.
Geoff
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf