Re: [APPS-REVIEW] NOMCOM Reviews

[John C Klensin <klensin at jck.com>]

--On Tuesday, 21 October, 2008 07:13 -0400 "Joel M. Halpern"
<jmh at joelhalpern.com> wrote:

> This seems to have intersected the ongoing process rather
> awkwardly.
> The nomcom is in the process of putting together the feedback
> requests.   They will start going out very soon.
> 
> Without being too specific about what we are doing, I think I
> can reasonably say that I have been working (thorugh the IESG
> liaison) with all the ADs to make sure we have the email
> addresses of all the members of all the directorates.

Joel,

Thanks.  I think that is entirely appropriate, but that you
should have access to the various review teams and other groups,
as well as formal directorates, if you need or want them (I'm
making no recommendation as to whether you should want them or
not, only that you should have the right to get and use those
lists).

While I'm on the subject, I do have one recommendation to make.
It is possible that sitting members of the IAB or IESG
(including either those who are continuing or those who are up
for renewal) may have comments on their peers and/or the
dynamics of how those groups function.  I believe that the
Nomcom's obligation of confidentiality about comments about
candidates, when combined with the responsibility of the
liaisons to represent their organizations and report back to
them, _requires_ that you be able to offer those IAB and IESG
members confidentiality about their input... confidentiality
that would exclude the liaisons from those two bodies from any
knowledge of the input itself.  

Again, the Nomcom is free under the procedures to make whatever
rules it likes.  However, 3777 is clear enough that the
activities of the liaisons must be consistent with other
requirements on the Nomcom, including the paramount requirement
of confidentiality, that any leakage of the content or tone of
such comments back to the relevant body --even to the liaisons
themselves-- would make Nomcom results questionable on grounds
of fairness and openness of input.

regards,
   john

_______________________________________________
APPS-REVIEW mailing list
APPS-REVIEW at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review