Re: What is the problem [was Re: SUMMARY: publish list of nominees?]

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

I think we were talking about using the liaisons as *witnesses* to
the process rather than intervening. Obviously they act as a communications
channel anyway, as a matter of definition.

   Brian

Donald Eastlake 3rd wrote:
> 
> While there would be nothing wrong, in my view, to adding something
> explicit about the liaisons "advising" the nomcom, the system is
> deliberately designed to give the most authority to the IETF community
> through the voting members.
>         Given that people and people's judgements of people are
> involved, I do not think it is possible to ever run the nomcom so that
> everyone would agree that the process was "superb"ly executed.
>         Giving liaiasons a clear voice seems fine, giving liaisons more
> authority just takes away authority from the IETF community and takes
> another step, if a small one, back towards making the governing bodies
> self-perpetuating as the IAB was before the nomcom scheme was adopted.
> 
> Donald
> 
>  On Sun, 31 Mar 2002, Scott Brim wrote:
> 
> > Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 17:14:09 -0500
> > From: Scott Brim <swb@employees.org>
> > To: Marshall Rose <mrose+internet.ietf.nomcom@dbc.mtview.ca.us>,
> >      Joel M. Halpern <joel@stevecrocker.com>
> > Cc: ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com
> > Subject: Re: What is the problem [was Re: SUMMARY: publish list of
> >     nominees?]
> >
> > > From: "Marshall Rose" <mrose+internet.ietf.nomcom@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
> > > Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 5:05 PM
> >
> > > you seem to equate adult supervision with being in charge. it isn't.
> > > it's considerably more subtle and valuable. (of course, one of the
> > > ex-officio's is the chair of the nomcom.)
> > >
> > > the idea behind having the four there is that you have another set of
> > > checks and balances between the different organizations and
> personnel.
> > > (in addition, of course, to having folks there who can answer
> > > questions about how the bodies operate and provide pointers to lots of
> > > resources...
> > >
> > > so, i'm back to "no change is needed".
> >
> > If we could give the ex officio members the responsibility of keeping the
> > process superb, in writing, that might be all we need.