On Mar 17, 2008, at 6:51 PM, Dan Wing wrote: >>>> And in order to make the confidentiality issue more concrete >>>> (ie, real) would folks offer some examples of what falls under >>>> it. >>> >>> "I accept the nomination of area director. The current area >>> director, Mr. J. Sixpack, has been attempting to impose his >>> opinion that beer should contain rice. This is causing a rift >>> in the working groups within the area. I would follow the area >>> consensus that we should outlaw rice in beer and thus my >>> appointment as new area director would achieve peace and >>> harmony within the area." >> >> Why should such a statement be confidential? > > Imagine it is complaining about an IAB member, and the IAB is > the confirming body. That outgoing IAB member is part of the > IAB until the new IAB is seated. That outgoing IAB member may > well take offense to someone thinking rice is unsuitable for > beer. First of all, I fully agree with others it should be the candidate's choice about what to disclose to whom. having said that, if I were the candidate in question and had a dispute with an IAB member, I'd want the confirming body to know everything to make a good judgment call. Call me an idealist:), I personally believe, generally speaking, it is better to put everything on the table, rather than partial info, between nomcom and confirming body. Step up a level: wonder where this discussion is leading to? Exactly how to revise 3777? Lixia _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf