Re: Nomcom candidate name announcement alternatives

[Scott Brim <swb@employees.org>]

On Wed, Jul 17, 2002 01:57:39PM +0900, Dave Crocker allegedly wrote:
> (my summary attempted to be a neutral reporting.  when I modify that text, 
> i'll put the neutral hat back on.  but not until then...)\
> 
> At 01:38 PM 7/17/2002 +0900, Scott Brim wrote:
> >Avri's suggestion of being able to opt out is important.  We
> >should consider whether the default is to publish a name (which the
> >nominee can opt out of) or to not publish a name (but send a request to
> >do so to the nominee).
> 
> We need to respect different cultures, yes.  However that is different from 
> saying that we must try to be comfortable to all cultures.  The attempt to 
> adapt to everyone all the time leads to process and culture mush.  No 
> coherence.
> 
> Letting candidates define the rules is just plain bad.
> 
> Either the community feels that we need to publish names or the community 
> feels we do not.  One rule for everyone.

Dave, are you attempting to set up a highly polarized situation in order
to more easily knock down the (pushed to extreme) alternative you don't
like?  No need to confuse the goals with the mechanisms.  The idea of
publishing names already makes everyone somewhat uncomfortable.  I was
told that comfort isn't the issue, dishonor is.  It's okay to seek a
balance.