On 03/11/13 14:41, Mary Barnes allegedly wrote: > This year's set of nominees was far more diverse than in the past and > yet the IESG will still be entirely male and entirely North > American/European. Of course, only people that bothered to use the > tool to input comments would see that. So, indeed the nomcom process > is part of the problem. Mary: I believe you would agree with this but your language doesn't seem to say so: just because the nomcom chose a less diverse set of nominees from a more diverse set of candidates doesn't mean there is something wrong with the nomcom or the nomcom process. It may be that this nomcom did take diversity into account, and diversity was outweighed by other factors that are at least as important. Do you have what you consider to be proof that the nomcom didn't consider diversity? I have direct experience of at least a few nomcoms that did. Are you looking for quotas? Do you think diversity is more important than e.g. demonstrated ability to lead, at the top level? Scott