On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Scott Brim <swb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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? [MB] I think I do - the process was quite inconsistent in terms of how certain nominees were treated during interviews, etc. Also, as I said in another email, Nomcom has a tough job as the process is based upon them considering community input. When there is a bias in that input, then of course, there may be bias in the process. [/MB] I have direct > experience of at least a few nomcoms that did. [MB] In my Nomcom experience I do not believe we did as good of a job considering this as we should have. Some of the community comments about female nominees were disrespectful and showed ignorance of the fact that women are different - yes women are more likely to shed tears when we are upset than to yell or curse or physically push someone around (which I have been at these meetings). To suggest that someone is not qualified to be an AD because they shed tears in a contentious situation is unacceptable IMHO. Lack of respect for the most basic diversity that exists both between genders and cultures is a big problem IMHO. [/MB] Are you looking for > quotas? [MB] Absolutely NOT!!! Do you think diversity is more important than e.g. demonstrated > ability to lead, at the top level? [MB] Absolutely NOT!!! What I'm looking for is for IETF to recognize that there may be a bias in how these decisions are made and to make a conscientious decision to be aware of how this bias may impact their decisions. I realize that this is a rather bold expectation given that this is not a problem unique to IETF: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/25/science/bias-persists-against-women-of-science-a-study-says.html?_r=0 But, again, as an international open organization, I would expect the IETF to at least make an effort. [/MB] > > Scott >