> > => With all due respect to those people, I think it's a shame > > they feel like that. It seems like the selection decision > is perceived > > as a personal judgement by those people. Good people may not > > get selected for a million reasons. I hate making blanket > judgements > > but this kind of attitude is probably not a healthy attitude for > > an AD-to-be. > > But there is another issue. When someone asks their employer for > agreement to be a candidate, the employer may worry about the PR > impact. Imagine: > > "Flarion employee passed over for prestigious IETF job; major > competitor chosen instead" > > So the candidate's personal attitude may not come into it at all. => I thought we were all participating as people not on behalf of our companies :) You're right of course, some companies can be embarrased by this. Not that it will result in a drop in share price (we're far from being that important). There is a worse outcome too, a company might react to the above incident by trying to influence (one way or another) to get its employee in this position next time. So there is some cultural improvements that will need to go with our process. And just as importantly, we'll need objective behaviour from all parties involved. But in the absence of all that, no process will be useful IMO. The difference is, in one case (today) it's a secret, and in the other it's out in the open. Hesham > > Brian > > =========================================================== This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient please contact the sender and delete all copies. =========================================================== _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf