Nomcom process
As a basic process for sending people to the nominating committee, I
believe we should stick with soliciting interest from the general
public, producing short-lists, etc.
That said, there are several things I'd suggest we change against
last year's practice:
* We selected free-form applications. That has proven to be a bad
idea, given the unstructured and sometimes lengthy material we
received. I'd suggest we go for a form-based approach like last
year's nominating committee. Before adopting their form from last
year, though, it could be a good idea to hear about any practical
experiences -- as in, "nobody seriously answered question x."
* If we go for a form-based approach, we have to think about
possibly adding some questions on how people believe that *we* are
the ones who should send them to nomcom.
* We need to get at-large structures involved. There are several
ways to do that:
- Ask them for nominations, and give their nominations particular
weight.
- Look for candidates among their members.
- Ask them to vet a short-list of nominees. This, of course,
brings us to the question what information about nominees we are
going to make publicly available, and how we possibly expect
structures to deal with that informtion. We could, of course,
ask the structures to send us one person, each, that
participates in the nomcom member picking exercise.
* We need to be more proactive in soliciting statements of interest
from good candidates.
In terms of moving forward now, I'd suggest that we attempt to come
up with a rough proposal quickly, and send that to als-discuss for
review and further refinement. Maybe we even get some feedback this
time...
Thoughts?
--
Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/