Re: DISCUSSION: rejecting candidates

["Joel M. Halpern" <joel@stevecrocker.com>]

As far as I can tell, it is important that the review committee be able to 
review for more than just "process" problems.  Let me provide one purely 
hypothetical example.
We have a ~pseudo-randomly~ selected nomcomm.  Many of the folks on the 
nomcomm have agendas.  (That's inevitable.)  It is possible to get a random 
alignment such that enough of the nomcom shares an agenda and it dominates 
the picture.  If they felt that the IESG needed to be shaken up, or the IAB 
needed to all share some political / economic agenda, or otherwise choose 
for additional reasons, the nomcom members are clearly capable of doing so 
while complying with the process.  In fact, I would not want a set of rules 
that made this impossible.  It is necessary for the review bodies to be 
able to say "no, those people are a bad idea."
Another hypothetical example is a case where the nomcom in collecting its 
information manages not to notice that there nominee clashes extremely 
badly with some sitting person whom he would have to work with.  Yes, this 
is something they should look for.  But they are human and good process 
does not ensure that all input is received and evaluated as one would 
like.  Mistakes get made.  It is important that the review body be able to 
apply judgement to the review.

I understand the concern that the review body can not and should not 
recapitulate the entire nomcom process.  But something strong than "process 
review" is necessary.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern

At 12:34 PM 4/17/2002 -0400, Mark Allman wrote:

> > We disagree. I explicitly think the approving body needs the
> > authority to simply reject a candidate, as it does
> > today. Otherwise, it is toothless.
> >
> > Since we disagree, let's shut up and hear from other people.
>
> I tend to agree with Dave.  I see no reason why the confirming
> bodies should say "no" for any reason except process problems.  They
> do not do the research the nomcom does, they do not have the time
> nomcom does and we (globally) should not expend the energy to
> conduct two seperate analyses.
>
> But,
>
> Brian- Can you sketch a hypothetical scenario where you believe it
> would be appropriate (for example) for the IAB to reject an AD
> choice made by the nomcom -- given that everyone is comfortable with
> the process followed by the nomcom?
>
> Maybe something specific would illustrate the point you're making to
> some of who do not Get It.
>
> allman
>
>
> --
> Mark Allman -- BBN/NASA GRC -- http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~mallman/
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>