Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Thu, 26 March 2015 14:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85D8D1A1A90 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.141
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.141 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_INFO=1.448, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5wPBa6ALlqdN for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (ow5p.x.rootbsd.net [208.79.81.114]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBB411ACE88 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 07:32:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx1.yitter.info (dhcp-b10d.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.177.13]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED0298A031 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:32:08 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:32:07 -0500
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Nomcom feedback to appointees not up for renewal
Message-ID: <20150326143207.GL6734@mx1.yitter.info>
References: <5513FE6B.7090405@dcrocker.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5513FE6B.7090405@dcrocker.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/9V4bDssyuPxw1KEx-6F2fH650CQ>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:33:08 -0000

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 07:41:15AM -0500, Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> So I suggest that providing explicit feedback to all appointees not up
> for renewal become a regular part of nomcom's deliverables.

I get the desire to use data that is picked up accidentally.  And in
general I hate to throw away data and I certainly support providing
the kind of feedback we're talking about.  But my impression is that
the nomcom's job is already onerous, and if we add to their workload
we may be asking too much.

Surely there's some other way to get the anonymous feedback to sitting
people.  Maybe an anonymous remailer is all we need?  There's nothing
for the nomcom to act on anyway if they get feedback about someone not
sitting.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com