Re: DISCUSSION: rejecting candidates

[Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>]

Thinking through this on a case-by-case basis - this particular case set is 
seen from the confirming body.

Scenario 1:
Nomcom makes a selection. The confirming body has information which, in its 
opinion, makes the candidate obviously unsuited for the job, and which it 
thinks that the nomcom cannot possibly have considered.

Scenario 2:
Nomcom makes a selection. The confirming body doesn't like the candidate 
much.

Scenario 3:
Nomcom makes a selection. The confirming body doesn't have a specific 
objection to the candidate, but would rather have someone else.

I think we would want to make it possible for the confirming body to reject 
the nominee in scenario 1, but that it would be a constitutional crisis if 
it were to reject the nomination in scenarios 2 and 3.

The problem with writing that into the rules is, of course, that without 
discussion between Nomcom and the confirming body, there is no way either 
body can tell which scenario we're in.

                    Harald


--On onsdag, april 17, 2002 08:30:51 -0700 Dave Crocker 
<dcrocker@brandenburg.com> wrote:

> At 10:01 AM 4/17/2002 +0200, Brian E Carpenter 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.
>
> Brian, I have raised some specific points that you have not responded to
> yet. Simply trading shots of i-am-right-you-are-wrong is not very helpful.
>
> 1.  How can the approving body do an evaluation that matches the depth
> and care of nomcom?  It does not replicate the nomcom process.
>
> 2.  To the extent that the approving body can perform an equivalently
> thorough analysis, then what is the point of having nomcom in the first
> place, since it is redundant with the effort of the approving body.