Hi Pete,
I agree with you that the NOMCOM is not required by the RFC to interview every candidate. However, we were told that one reason to do so was that doing the cut of who we interview might actually take more time off the calendar than actually doing every interview because one needs a an agreed process for the cut, and it would contract the timelines for both questionnaire responses and community feedback.
Anyway, I support what Dean said in the plenary: probably a good time for a draft to be written to review/revise NOMCOM processes. Nothing happens without a draft, of course.
Eliot
On 21 Mar 2025, at 9:32, ivandean@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 3/20/2025 9:53 PM, Salz, Rich wrote:
There is a difference between what the rules officially say, and what the community expects. I would expect that if someone wasn’t picked, and they did not have an interview, that it would be highly likely they would file an appeal.
I have never seen any discussion in the community indicating any expectation that any candidate gets interviewed, let alone every. If some candidate who did not get picked and didn't get an interview appealed, I would expect the ISOC President (or other arbiter) to take exactly 10 minutes to ask the NomCom chair on what basis they made the decision, the NomCom chair would say, "We eliminated based on the person's CV and/or questionnaire answers", and the arbiter would say to the appellant, "There is no requirement for an interview in 8713, the NomCom has full discretion to run their process as they see fit, they did due diligence, and you can go away."
The IETF community easily gets up in arms if someone suggests doing something out of the “norm”. (Ask me how I know :)
If the NomCom is currently under the impression that they need to interview every candidate, let this be notice that this member of the community expects them to stop doing that immediately. They should come up with a process that eliminates obviously unqualified candidates and stop wasting their time interviewing people who have no business in those positions.
NomCom should really be able to reduce number of interviews to about 30ish most serious nominees.
Yes, and they can now. If it is not required by 8713, NomCom can do what they want. If the community complains, the next NomCom can choose to do something different.
For that we need the community feedback to be done two weeks before the 3rd IETF.
That is something that the community complained about, but what about the NomCom people and their time? Should they really be the ones who have to forego the participation in the 3rd IETF. Updating few things would be very helpful for future NomComs
No update is required. Simply choose not to do that in the future. In my opinion, it is a huge failure of the NomCom process if the NomCom is being told that they MUST do anything not required by 8713.
pr
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
