Subject: Re: NomCom 2011-2012 feedback

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 13:14:59 -0400

Hi SM,

> Dear 2011-2012 nominating committee members,
> 
> You requested feedback from the IETF community for positions on the IESG, IAB and IAOC.  As none of the candidates shared their views about a simple question that was asked on the IETF mailing list, I gather that none of them are reading the mailing list.  

This would be a false conclusion.

(BTW, I've seen your e-mail on this list and on a few IETF WG lists, but I haven't mapped it to a name.  Are you someone I've met at IETF meetings, or in other contexts?  I like to know who I'm speaking to...)

Margaret

---

From: SM <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:14:49 -0700

Hi Suresh,
At 20:01 30-10-2011, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
>If you feel that the position of the nominees on a specific issue is
>important to know, please send us a note about the issue and why you
>think it is important.

The selection process uses an advice and consent model where  the 
IETF Community leaves it to a group of random volunteers to review 
the positions to be filled and advise the relevant body about the 
appropriate person to fill a position.  I find the randomness 
interesting and I prefer not to signify a preference based on my 
perception that the nominee might agree with a position I take.  If I 
felt that the position of the nominees on a specific issue was 
important, it would be like issue-based voting.

"Seeing from another's point of view is often revealing, even when it 
fails to be compelling". [RFC 3184]

Thanks for the explanation,
-sm

P.S. And a thanks to Margaret Wasserman