Re: DISCUSSION: rejecting candidates

[Rob Austein <sra+nomcom@hactrn.net>]

At Sun, 21 Apr 2002 09:06:24 -0700, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> 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.

Oh, it made a point, but probably not the one you intended.

> So a more detailed effort at that point:

Thanks.

> 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.

You appear to be using some interesting new definition of the word
"summarized" that I've not previously encountered.

At any rate: let's consider a hypothetical case in which the
confirming body has detected what it thinks is a process problem in
the nomcom and has not been able to get enough cooperation from the
nomcom to address its concerns about the process in a timely manner.
Now put yourself in the position of the confirming body, and think
about what options you have.  You could:

a) Reject the nomcom output and trigger a constitutional crisis;

b) Blindly accept the nomcom output even though the process that
   produced it appears to have been flawed;

c) Attempt to confirm independently that the nomcom's output is
   acceptable in spite of whatever flaws you think you've detected in
   the process that produced it.

Not a pretty choice.  I gather that you may think the confirming body
should not have option (c).  If so, you are of course entitled to your
opinion, but I respectfully submit that the cost to the IETF of ruling
out that option might be rather high.

This is of course a hypothetical situation, and any resemblance it
might bear to any nomcom or confirming body living, dead, or wandering
the night in ghostly torment is purely coincidental.