John C Klensin wrote:
--On Tuesday, September 05, 2006 3:10 PM -0400 Keith Moore
On balance, I think it would be preferable to make candidates'
names public as long as their consent is obtained before doing
I do not understand how it can be reasonable to have some candidates'
names disclosed and others' not. That makes things remarkably complex.
An IETF position entails massively public behavior. If a candidate
cannot tolerate public scrutiny during the selection process, what does
that say about their personal fragility and likely methods when in office?
(On the matter of fragility, I am merely acknowledging that having
candidates' names be public will likely result in there being
unprofessional behavior by some IETF participants, in making public
comment, rather than comment restricted to the Nomcom, and probably
making comments about personality rather than performance.)
One thing to watch out for in these proposals is that the Nomcom now has
the ability to brainstorm, conclude that person X would be a better
candidate for a particular position than any of the already-suggested
candidates, and then go out an start twisting X's arm. The idea is
I was not offering any comment -- nevermind any suggestion for change --
on the method(s) for obtaining candidates. Rather, once a candidate is
formally under Nomcom consideration, then their name would be made public,
While it is probably not impossible to reconcile it with public lists of
candidates, reconciling the two might require some effort.
I do not understand what "reconciling" is needed. Whenever a candidate
becomes a formal candidate, their name gets published.
OK. For efficiency, the Nomcom might do some aggregations. For
example, it might choose to wait for completion of an initial slate of
candidates, before publishing any of their names. I am not sure we need
to dictate this.
How about a
specific proposal, folks? You and Dave clearly know how to do that,
even if some others who make a lot of postings to this list don't seem to.
1. I'm not sure what additional language is needed, above what I've
2. I'm not sure how a 'formal' proposal gets submitted, nor am I hopeful
it will be productive, given the disposition of most/all process
proposals over the last 5 years.
Ietf mailing list