Re: proposal for random selection process for nominations

["James R. (Chuck) Davin" <[e-mail]>]

Craig,

If we do not trust the ombudsman enough simply to choose names out of
a hat, then we have a problem.

We should be focusing on procedures that insure installation of
credible, accountable leaders rather than fretting unduly about how to
constrain them procedurally (or even algorithmically :-)) in the
performance of their duties.

I believe that appointment of the ombudsman by the ISOC is credible
and workable. But even if one didn't feel that way, selection of the
ombudsman is not a hard problem because the duties of the office are
well delimited and well isolated from the flow of technical business.

In my election day musings, I hypothesized that the ombudsman could be
popularly elected: after all, the only real duty of the ombudsman is
to be trustworthy and discrete. Because the position has very little
bearing upon technical substance, selecting an ombudsman as we would a
prom king or queen is unlikely to politicize our technical work.

If trust is a problem, I prefer solutions that focus more on
protoplasm than on software :-).

Bio-degradeable,
Chuck