Re: Nomcom candidate name announcement alternatives

[Dave Crocker <dcrocker@brandenburg.com>]

At 08:59 AM 7/17/2002 +0200, Loa Andersson wrote:
> so far I haven't seen any claims that maintaining status quo is a
> problem within any culture, but several claiming that it will be
> for some cultures

Wearing my 'objective reporter' hat for a moment, I believe this suggest 
that I need to add a CON, to the ALL entry, suggesting that disclosure 
risks running contrary to some cultures.

With my reporter hat OFF:

The issue of other cultures strikes me as simply one of the many different 
issues we must juggle.

I have stated my own preference and why, but have been told it got 
missed.  So here it is explicitly:

The nomcom does not need more information at the early stages.  It already 
gets plenty.  And I do not believe for one second that it needs to be told 
additional names for candidates.  Anyone who is serious and available gets 
mentioned.  Someone will mention them to nomcom.

The nomcom process of surveying the community is not merely extensive.  It 
is massive.  Nomcom finds out the basics about all the candidates.  The 
fact that nomcom might not talk to one or another particular person that 
someone thinks is essential is a concern that I do not find 
compelling.  Nomcom talks to lots and lots of people.  The idea that a 
single person has highly special insight into a candidate is something we 
should find troubling.  That gives that one person too much leverage over a 
candidacy.

The purpose of disclosure of the names is to make sure that everyone who 
might have relevant information gets the opportunity to provide it.

There are two, pragmatic and real benefits that might accrue from 
publication of names:

1.  We no longer have to worry about missing input.  Worrying about 
nomcom's missing input is a real issue today.  As I said, I do not believe 
this concern is valid, but the confirming bodies and the community are not 
convinced that nomcom's information is adequate, and it is essential that 
the confirming bodies and the community be comfortable.

2.  Every once in awhile, someone DOES have an interesting tidbit to add to 
the mix of knowledge about a candidate.  These tidbits can add texture and 
flavor to the picture of a candidate and that enhanced information can 
improve the ability to resolve subtle concerns and close choices.

So, I tend to prefer publishing the list of candidates that make the final 
cut.  That will permit enough time for people with important insight to 
provide it.  It also will limit the public exposure to the very few people 
who are in final contention to hold a public position that requires they 
have a tough hide.  And it permits nomcom to use the information 
efficiently.  It doesn't carry the process trauma that comes with having to 
reverse a selection.

d/


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