On 21.03.2025 16:25, Michael StJohns
wrote:
On 3/21/2025 7:45 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
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.
Hi Eliot -
I find the above... sorry - a specious argument.
The criteria for "fail fast" in selecting people is something that can and should be done before you ever send out the "please volunteer" notices. Then the only argument is whether or not some candidate meets those criteria, and the obvious answer if there's enough of a push back on someone not qualifying (by one or members of the nomcom voting group) is to move them to the "we're going to interview you" queue.
But - YMMV....
Indeed, every NOMCOM member's mileage would vary on that point,
unless they agreed on those criteria first, and that takes time.
And it takes time to do the evaluation across the different
positions and come to agreement. The NOMCOM met about once per
week in the summer. You could say, “meet more often” but at least
this time, it didn't really happen.
Eliot
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0x87B66B46D9D27A33.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
