Re: DISCUSSION: rejecting candidates

[Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>]

Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> 
> --On fredag, mars 29, 2002 13:53:53 -0500 "Joel M. Halpern"
> <joel@stevecrocker.com> wrote:
> 
> > While I am not sure it can be achieved, I agree strongly with Avri's goal
> > of enabling the approval bodies to say no without exploding the entire
> > process.
> >
> > One step that may help is to change the text that says the whole slate is
> > approved or rejected so as to allow for specific rejection.
> 
> well, it doesn't say that in 2727:
> 
>    c. The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates, consenting to
>       some, all, or none.
> 
> ....
> 
>    d. The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB candidates,
>       consenting to some, all, or none.
> 
Exactly. I think we need to adjust the timing to give NomCom enough
time to identify a replacement candidate - that is the practical
problem today.

> the problem is that even rejecting one candidate can be considered "going
> nuclear".

When I think about it, extra time would make this less of a problem. The timing
today is very tight and a rejection would create a real panic, just when the
I-Ds are raining down on us by the hundreds.

    Brian

> 
> BTW, combating the "nomcom is a black box" feeling that Brian reports may
> be one argument in favour of having an ISOC Board liaison on the Nomcom.
> 
>                  Harald