Yes, I did mean the chair does not influence the choices. And, facilitating the process was the most general way I could categorize all their responsibilities which definitely have impact on the overall outcome. I surely know what all that involves. But, I personally do not think the chair's opinion should unduly influence the outcome. I think one thing being missed here is that the most important aspect of the decision making is that it is based on community feedback and the voting members should strive to make that the primary input for their decision making.
Personally, I think we pick someone as Nomcom chair who has the trust of the community to do the right thing. So, I don't at all think there's a concern with affiliation. Although, as I type this, I do think we've had past Nomcoms where the chair's affiliation has influenced the outcome. So, I'll go along with maybe this extra caution being reasonable..
Regards,
Mary.
On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:59 AM Ted Lemon <mellon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 8, 2019, at 8:45 AM, Mary B <mary.h.barnes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I totally agree with Lou. I don't think that affiliations of anyone other than voting members are required to be considered.. I will also add that in my opinion the chair is there to facilitate the process and isn't a key decision maker when it comes to the appointments themselves. Certainly, each nomcom decides processes they will use themselves, but if they decide a process where the chair can influence the outcome, I personally think something is wrong from the outset.I don’t think it’s a problem that what I am about to say is true, but I do think that it’s somewhat strange to imagine that the chair of nomcom would not have a singnificant impact on the outcome of the nomcom process. If they didn’t, why would we need a chair? Why not just throw the n00bs in a room together and hope for the best? Of course the chair influences the outcome. This is unavoidable.I assume that what you mean when you say the chair doesn’t influence the outcome is that the chair doesn’t influence the choices that are made by the voting members. Again, the mere presence of the chair in the process can’t avoid affecting the choices that are made. If the chair is any good, they are going to at the very least help the n00bs to figure out how to do the evaluation, and if this is done properly, it should have a good impact on the outcome of the process.Of course, we would like to think that the chair will not have any influence on the process that could provide a way for a conflict of interest to manifest, but again the notion here is that any such conflict of interest would be deliberate. But that’s not the only way that conflict of interest can manifest; indeed, it’s quite possible for people with the best intentions to have unconscious biases which manifest in ways that are difficult to notice, much less prevent.I think it’s to Victor’s credit that he decided to take this into account. Perhaps it does set a precedent, or perhaps it’s a one-time thing. But I think it’s actually a good precedent. Serving on nomcom is a duty and a privilege for those of us who want the IETF to succeed. It is not something to which we are entitled. If it were, I would be complaining a bit more vociferously about the fact that I’ve never been selected: the point is, the nomcom process doesn’t promise us all a chance to participate, and this is by design.
