On 2008-03-19 15:23, Dave Crocker wrote: > > Michael StJohns wrote: >> At 10:46 PM 3/17/2008, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: >>> *The names of people nominated should be made public. >>> *The names of the people who agreed to serve if selected should be kept >>> secret. >> +1 >> >> Open enough to get feedback, but kind to the rejected candidates. > > > +1 It's very tempting to say +1 without thinking about the unintended consequences. Clearly, if NomCom published a proposed slate and ask for comments (to be kept confidential) they would get a lot of comments. However, if they published a proposed slate and said "we have now sent this to the Confirming Body", something rather different would probably happen. The community comments would be sent to the confirming body, who would then be forced into the position of reviewing those comments and truly second-guessing the NomCom. So if we made this change, I think we would have to do two other things at the same time: 1. Add a new period to the timeline for the community to send comments to NomCom and for NomCom to consider those comments, and possibly change the slate as a result (in which case, GOTO 1). 2. Explicitly reduce the confirming bodies' role to verifying that due process has been followed, since there is clearly no scope for further debate about the chosen nominees after step 1. Brian _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf