Re: Should the NomCom rules define CB voting behavior

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>]

--On onsdag, april 02, 2003 14:47:55 +0200 Brian E Carpenter 
<brian@hursley.ibm.com> wrote:

> fwiw I agree with Harald. I think a timeout on the confirmation process
> (let's think in terms of 4 weeks) is entirely reasonable and would
> prevent filibusters. It would also avoid constructing interlocks
> between RFC 2727bis and the IAB Charter and ISOC By-laws.
>
> However, a question about Harald's parenthesis:
>
> > (The question of whether the IAB should document its rules for deciding
> > on a nomcom slate is a separate matter - I think it should)
>
> Do you want more detail than what is already in 2727bis and RFC 2850?
> If so, why? And do you want the ISOC Board to do the same?

the detail needed is probably on the order of:

- any member of the IAB who is on the slate will recuse him/herself, just
 as the IETF Chair does
- members who have been considered but are not nominated need not recuse
 themselves
- there should be something about whether or not the liaison to the nomcom
 should recuse him/herself - just so there's no doubt
- the IAB treats the response to nomcom as a single decision on a slate,
 not as a series of 1-person decisions (or the other way round; either
 way of deciding is internally consistent)
- a simple majority of the nonrecused members is sufficient to make a
 decision - ie the "3 may block" rule is relaxed because of the deadline

nothing controversial or non-obvious, once one spends a few cycles thinking 
about it. but as Mike said - better to think of it beforehand than in the
heat of the need to make a decision before the deadline.

and I think the IAB needs to be the one who decides it.
Yes, I think the ISOC board should do the same.

                  Harald