On Mon, 6 Nov 2006, Fred Baker wrote:
On Nov 5, 2006, at 6:59 PM, Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
Frankly the feedback does not need to seen by anyone other than the
voting members IMO. What do others think?
So your point is that the chair of the nominating committee should
not know who the candidates are?
I think Lakshminath was NOT referring to the list of candidates (which
is confidential, but historically has been shared with a fairly broad
list of people) and feedback on the candidates offered by others in
the community (whether solicited or not), which is currently
considered confidential. It would be silly to try to keep the chair
from knowing the names of the candidates.
But as for the feedback:
As a NomCom member, I found the community feedback very valuable, and
I strongly suspect that we would have gotten less rich feedback had we
not promised to keep that feedback confidential. While I can imagine
situations where the voting NomCom members, or even a subset of them,
might want to keep particular feedback to themselves, I don't see a
need to formally restrict the set of people who generally see the
feedback. The chair and liasons, in particular, probably need to see
that feedback in order to participate fully, as 3777 says they may.
As for other matters:
I would like to see the list of nominations kept confidential for much
the same reasons as keeping the feedback confidential -- it will
encourage more input.
As for the list of candidates, one of two things should happen: either
make it public (my preferred choice, since it will encourage richer
feedback) or do more to keep it confidential. If it's going to be
confidential, NomCom needs to be more active about making the "short
list" a bit "noisier", perhaps by including far more bogus candidates
(credible ones, perhaps drawn from those who declined nominattions)
and, to the extent the NomCom can easily present different "short
lists" to each individual asked for feedback, randomly dropping names
from the "short list". In favor of continuing to keep the list
confidential (again, NOT my preferred choice): doing so would give the
NomCom more latitude to do something a bit outside the rules, like
allowing late nominations and even selecting a candidate who wasn't
on the public list, which it may well find to be a compelling choice.
-- Sam
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf