Re: DISCUSSION: rejecting candidates

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 12:04 AM 4/21/2002 -0400, Rob Austein wrote:
> Amusing rant, Dave, but as far as I can tell it has nothing to do with
> anything I said.

Rob, I had hoped that the difference in tone between the rest of my note 
and the section commenting on your own note would make a point, but 
apparently it was missed.

So a more detailed effort at that point:


At 07:23 PM 4/17/2002 -0400, Rob Austein wrote:
> > 1.  How can the approving body do an evaluation that matches the depth and
> > care of nomcom?  It does not replicate the nomcom process.
>
> The confirming body probably can't.  It may, however, feel that it
> must try, if the available alternatives to doing so look bad enough.

Your response is summarized simply as:  the confirming body probably can't 
match the nomcom effort, but it may feel like trying.

So it might feel like trying to do something it can't succeed at.

Your response suggests that we should accept this, even though you admit it 
is not viable.

A distinctive item in this whole thread is the tendency to propose or 
support categories of activity that have no underlying basis offered to us, 
in spite of specific arguments against them.

So if you want to do more than object to my tone, please consider 
explaining why we should find it acceptable for a confirming body to try to 
do something they will not succeed at.

d/

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