On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
nomcom doesn't always hear back a reason.
Andy Bierman <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> First it would be good to confirm (from NOMCOM?) why people are rejecting
> AD nominations. IMO asking 25 - 40 hours a week for 2 years is too much,
> but I am guessing that 1/2 of that is the right number to require.
I'm not sure that nomcom has the time to investigate; while the list of
people who accepted is public according to BCP10 (rfc5680), the list of
who declined is not.
We've been told a reason for decline about 10 times so far. Half of those cited the time commitment and uncertainty of support by their employer, the other half cited only their support for the incumbent. Sometimes people say that they won't try to get the support by their employer because they support the incumbent so they think their own candidacy isn't needed.
It would be nice if the list of who declined could be made available (perhaps
under NDA) to some researcher to do a survey.
When we get a little time, we can think about auto-generating invitations to the decliners to fill in an anonymizing online survey.