Re: NomCom procedures revision

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

I was a bit confused by this discussion.  By 3777, the chair establishes 
the voting procedure.  By assumption, he establishes it before it is needed.

A sensible chair will establish procedures that the committee is 
comfortable with.  Since it is the chair who will administer whatever 
proecedures are used, it eh committee does not trust the chair to 
establsih them, why would the committee trust the chair to adminsiter them?

I would hate to have an overly strict rule on voting procedures, and a 
couple of nomcom members get into a typical IETF dispute about the best 
answer, and thereby hang the work of the nomcom.

Why is this being made more complex, with strict priority, strict rules 
on adoption, etc?

Yours,
Joel

On 8/28/15 5:51 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>> On 8/28/2015 4:13 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>> Once established, this procedure
>>>     cannot be altered until the current nominating committee is
>>>     dissolved.
>>>
>>> A) It turns out that voting mechanisms are *tricky* beasts. The idea
>>> that a nomcom will make them 100% right on the first try is a Bad Idea.
>>
>> That assertion would seem to run contrary to the process rigidity you
>> are proposing above.
>
> Indeed.
> One would hope that a NomCom that discovers it is really unhappy with its voting mechanism can use exactly that voting mechanism to agree to make changes.
>
> Adrian
>
>