[governance] nomcom's creteria - was multistakeholding

[Milton L Mueller]

Avri:
> > you cannot support support a statement that the next nomcom should
> > follow the written  rules and publish its criteria before its makes
it
> > selections?

Nomcoms should follow written rules, yes.

But the caucus should know the general criteria that it should use
_before_ a Nomcom is even constituted. The nomcom should not make up new
criteria every time it is formed and then stimulate endless debate in
the middle of a selection process by publishing them to a list. I cannot
believe this is being seriously proposed. 

Once you have the criteria you have no choice but to let the nomcom
apply those criteria as it sees fit. Either you accept the Nomcom model
or you don't. You can't have it both ways. You can't delegate selection
authority to a group that works in private and then try to open up the
selection process partially in mid stream.

Publication of their alleged "criteria" accomplishes nothing. Unless the
Nomcom publishes the NAMES of the people it proposes to select and
reject prior to making the selection (which is obviously silly), the
publication of "criteria" will just allow hecklers to second-guess
decisions and haggle over possible applications of the criteria. This is
utterly pointless. 

Furthermore, a Nomcom that was truly "out of control" or determined to
select some people and reject others in a prejudicial manner will _not_
be effectively stopped by this pre-publication of criteria. The only
check you have against that would be dissent within the Nomcom. So you
have to trust the random selection process.  


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 7:18 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] nomcom's creteria - was multistakeholding
> 
> 
> > >
> > > What gratefulness are we showing to this nomcom, and what message
> > > are we
> > > giving to the future ones, by chastising it for doing what the
group
> > > clearly
> > > meant it to do... In light of above, I cant support this
statement.
> >
> >
> 
> 
> Avri, You are asking me to re write the whole email I wrote a little
while
> earlier, which in view of other members' sensibilities I am unable to.
> Parminder
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 3:30 PM
> > To: Governance Caucus
> > Subject: Re: [governance] nomcom's creteria - was multistakeholding
> >
> >
> > On 7 Jun 2008, at 02:11, Parminder wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > What gratefulness are we showing to this nomcom, and what message
> > > are we
> > > giving to the future ones, by chastising it for doing what the
group
> > > clearly
> > > meant it to do... In light of above, I cant support this
statement.
> >
> >
> > you cannot support support a statement that the next nomcom should
> > follow the written  rules and publish its criteria before its makes
it
> > selections?
> >
> > a.
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >
> > For all list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance