Re: On being public (Was: Call for Nominees)

[Marshall Eubanks <tme at multicasttech.com>]

Dear Dave;

On Sep 15, 2008, at 12:29 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

>
>
> Leslie Daigle wrote:
>>    We need
>> to have some cultural sophistication if we're going to ask Sue to run
>> against incumbent Bob openly, given that Sue's WG has documents  
>> waiting
>> for Bob's approval.
>
> I hope that this observation scares folk as much as it should.  The  
> implication
> that an incumbent AD is to be feared implies that ADs have far too  
> much power.
>

My experience of the world is that some people will fear other people  
(and, more particularly, will
fear some particular other people). Some people are shy. Some are  
mistrustful. Some are insecure.
Some, I dare say it, may even have bad blood with some other IETFers.  
This is true in general, and
it only gets worse if there is a feeling that the other person has  
responsibility over your work.
(Note that B may be S's former boss, or a potential boss if a merger  
happens, or S may be
seeking employment at B's institution, etc.)

S may fear these things even if B isn't an AD (or, indeed, even if S  
is one), and so I don't see that
it bears on the question of AD power.

Regards
Marshall

>
>> Secondly, it's not really useful (to the whole system) if only some
>> candidates declare themselves publicly.
>
> That's just plain wrong.
>
> If a candidate wishes to encourage openness and encourage a broader  
> base of
> input to Nomcom, they can and should disclose their candidacy.   
> Nomcom will
> benefit from having better information, for the candidates who  
> choose to
> publicly disclose their candidFrom ietf-bounces at ietf.org  Mon Sep 15 09:42:44 2008
Return-Path: <ietf-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive at megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C2863A6B23;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:42:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBF7E3A68A9
	for <ietf at core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:42:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.211
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[AWL=0.388, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1,
	USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32])
	by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id f8A5X9PhRUh8 for <ietf at core3.amsl.com>;
	Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:42:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from multicasttech.com (lennon.multicasttech.com [63.105.122.7])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A481B3A6B39
	for <ietf at ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:42:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [63.105.122.7] (account marshall_eubanks HELO [IPv6:::1])
	by multicasttech.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.4.8)
	with ESMTP-TLS id 12991231; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:42:47 -0400
Message-Id: <ACF5D612-078C-47E5-A29A-B1F75FBF22CF at multicasttech.com>
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme at multicasttech.com>
To: dcrocker at bbiw.net
In-Reply-To: <48CE8D81.9080309 at dcrocker.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v926)
Subject: Re: On being public (Was: Call for Nominees)
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:42:46 -0400
References: <20080912164641.17EA43A6C3D at core3.amsl.com>	<p0625011bc4f06ed5a950 at [75.145.176.242]>
	<48CE87CF.1000701 at thinkingcat.com> <48CE8D81.9080309 at dcrocker.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.926)
Cc: IETF <ietf at ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

Dear Dave;

On Sep 15, 2008, at 12:29 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

>
>
> Leslie Daigle wrote:
>>    We need
>> to have some cultural sophistication if we're going to ask Sue to run
>> against incumbent Bob openly, given that Sue's WG has documents  
>> waiting
>> for Bob's approval.
>
> I hope that this observation scares folk as much as it should.  The  
> implication
> that an incumbent AD is to be feared implies that ADs have far too  
> much power.
>

My experience of the world is that some people will fear other people  
(and, more particularly, will
fear some particular other people). Some people are shy. Some are  
mistrustful. Some are insecure.
Some, I dare say it, may even have bad blood with some other IETFers.  
This is true in general, and
it only gets worse if there is a feeling that the other person has  
responsibility over your work.
(Note that B may be S's former boss, or a potential boss if a merger  
happens, or S may be
seeking employment at B's institution, etc.)

S may fear these things even if B isn't an AD (or, indeed, even if S  
is one), and so I don't see that
it bears on the question of AD power.

Regards
Marshall

>
>> Secondly, it's not really useful (to the whole system) if only some
>> candidates declare themselves publicly.
>
> That's just plain wrong.
>
> If a candidate wishes to encourage openness and encourage a broader  
> base of
> input to Nomcom, they can and should disclose their candidacy.   
> Nomcom will
> benefit from having better information, for the candidates who  
> choose to
> publicly disclose their candidacy, becacy, because more people will know  
> that comments
> on a particular candidate are needed.
>
> No candidate need wait for other candidates to agree to this.
>
> Contrary to your view, it is a very simple decision.
>
> More importantly, it is exactly the sort of decision that can and  
> should be
> individual and has no need to wait for some magic group decision or  
> formal IETF
> policy -- a decision that we've solidly demonstrated will not get  
> made.
>
> d/
>
> -- 
>
>   Dave Crocker
>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>   bbiw.net
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


ause more people will know  
> that comments
> on a particular candidate are needed.
>
> No candidate need wait for other candidates to agree to this.
>
> Contrary to your view, it is a very simple decision.
>
> More importantly, it is exactly the sort of decision that can and  
> should be
> individual and has no need to wait for some magic group decision or  
> formal IETF
> policy -- a decision that we've solidly demonstrated will not get  
> made.
>
> d/
>
> -- 
>
>   Dave Crocker
>   Brandenburg InternetWorking
>   bbiw.net
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf