RE: DISCUSSION: publish list of nominees?

["Schliesser, Benson" <Benson.Schliesser@savvis.net>]

> For example, if you have a deadline (say January 1) at which the
> list of confirmed nominees is frozen, what happens if on Jan 10
> (perhaps as a result of seeing the published list) all of the 
> potential
> candidates for some position withdraw?
> 
> Now the list is frozen, the nomcom cannot go find someone else, they'd
> have to leave a vacancy, to be filled sometime after the relevant
> body is appointed.
> 
> That's ridiculous.
> 
> All of this (deadlines, and exposing lists) also needs to consider
> how a nomcom goes about filling a casual vacancy.  Currently 
> we expect it
> to operate just the same way as it does when doing its "normal" job.
> Except it is usually expected to be quicker, as there's usually just
> one position to fill (the same process, compressed).

While I agree that there's an obvious need for an exception procedure, I
don't think that it's fair to call the entire proposal ridiculous.

Instead, I'd suggest that in cases where the nomcom finds that they are
outside of a normal timeline (i.e., all candidates withdraw or there's a
vacancy) the nomcom SHOULD develop a new timeline based on the same
procedures and announce it as the process to be used in the particular
instance.

In other words, if nominal steps include:

-assemble nomcom members
-publish procedures and timeline (i.e., something like this list, with
dates)
-call for nominations
-confirm nominations
-nomination cut-off
-publish confirmed nominations
-solicit public comment on confirmed nominations
-public comment cut-off
-present candidate(s) until confirmed

(or some variation) there's no reason that these steps can't be a) changed
in special cases, or b) used in a compressed timeframe. ..leave that
determination to the nomcom.


-Benson