Re: DISCUSSION: rejecting candidates

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 09:32 AM 4/15/2002 +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Dave Crocker wrote:
> ...
> >
> > There is a very big difference between a review body effectively responding
> > "please explain how you came to this extraordinary choice", versus
> > effectively responding "the review body believes you have not considered
> > matters adequately and need to talk to more people" or "the review body
> > believes you have made a bad choice, choose someone else".
>
> And the second mode is more likely to occur if there is a little more
> time, and if the NomCom is charged to supply the background information
> in the first place.


First of all, the idea that a bit more time will make it possible for the 
review body to replicate the work of nomcom is not realistic.

Second of all, if the idea is to seek to have the review body replicate the 
work of nomcom, then please let's get rid of nomcom.  Nomcom is not 
fun.  It is difficult, draining work.  It is bad enough having one group do 
the work.  It is downright abusive to suggest that two do it.

To repeat:  Nomcom formulates choices through a crucible process that is 
jam-packed with constraints and trade-offs.  The juggling act that produces 
those choices cannot be replicated by a few discussions among distant 
reviewers.

d/

----------
Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.850.1850