Re: another role for the nomcom?

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

The general thrust here is good.

But one thing that can get tricky is that input to the nomcom is
confidential, and feedback from the nomcom to specific parties about
their behavior can't be too specific lest it compromise
confidentiality. Indeed, some may assert that the nomcom procedures
don't really allow for the nomcom to provide input to those parties.

Also, who to share the info with is a multi-dimensional puzzle. If the
info is just shared with the individual, it may be hard for them on
their own to adjust behavior. Arguably, it would be good for a co-AD
(in the case of the IESG) to also hear the feedback as they can
provide balance and compensate as part of making a better team. And
certainly, the chairs of the respective groups, as part of their roles
in managing their bodies would do well to also be privy to this sort
of feedback, so they can also help compensate.

In the past, some nomcoms have provided feedback to incumbents that
were returned. But this has not been consistent, and some will assert
that those messages (when not entirely positive) are generally lost in
the overall message of "you've been returned".

I wonder if this is something we also should bring up in the nomcom WG
with regards to adding wording to 2727bis to better support this.

I do believe that the nomcom has a wealth of useful info on general
performance and it would be good to somehow tap into it.

Thomas