Hi John,
So, those of you who strongly advocate a public list... What
percentage of the already-too-small potential candidate pool are
you willing to lose? Are you convinced that anyone with
sensitivities or conditions similar to those outlined above
would make a bad AD if selected? Do you think the tradeoffs
are worth it?
There are possible tradeoffs in this decision. But let me turn the questions around for you: What percentage of the candidate pool are you willing to lose because other potential candidates don't realize that the set of realistic alternatives is small? Do you want to risk selecting someone that the nomcom didn't realize had issues but the IETF at large knew about it? Are you sure that you want to exclude input from the whole IETF? What image do we want to project from our process to the participants? Are you convinced that shyness from public eye isn't being used to guide the process by a set of insiders? Do you have any hard data about sensitivities, anything to back up the default (to me) assumption of being open? And if there is hard data, can you show that it is not an issue already, in the partial publicity of list-receivers and friends of candidates etc?
--Jari
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf