[arin-discuss] [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Position Petitions?

Jay Hennigan jay at impulse.net
Thu Sep 24 15:09:44 EDT 2009

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> John Curran wrote:
> I didn't think the NomCom would be able or willing to comment on
> the qualifications of a specific would-be candidate.  Nor was I
> asking that. 

This cuts to the heart of the issue.  The NomCom is an extension of the 
leadership of the organization.  If more candidates apply than are 
nominated, then there is an endorsement of those nominated and a 
non-endorsement of those not nominated.  This is done in a secret 
non-transparent manner under color of authority.

>> Making the NomCom a body which simply approves all Nominees  (unless 
>> completely defective) means we lose the "evaluation" portion  of its 
>> charter.  

But having the NomCom do "evaluation" in secret lacks transparency and 
injects bias into the election process between "endorsed" candidates and 
those who are put on the ballot through petition.

If that is the intent of its charter, then by definition we have a 
closed, secret, non-transparent process by which some candidates are 
placed in a "preferred" status over others.

Is this what we want?

In other organizations with which I've been associated, the NomCom 
typically acts more like a recruitment body that twists arms until it 
can get at least one warm body to volunteer for each office.  The 
problems are generally too few candidates, not too many.

>> Hence, the suggestion that all nominees get carried  
>> forward, but the Nomcom provides (or not) its endorsement of the  
>> nominee based on their ability to serve productively.  

> I still think what is called for here is transparency of the
> -criteria- that is used by the NomCom when determining whether
> a candidate meets qualifications for serving.  I just don't see
> anything in either of your explanations that is so unique that it
> could not be covered by a criteria list.

What about transparency?  If some candidates are rejected by the NomCom, 
should there be a public notice given that, "Candidate X applied but was 
not nominated because his qualifications failed to meet criterion Y"?

> All the NomCom needs to do is produce a document that lists criteria
> that they use.  They can either distill their experience into a
> list, or they can do as you did here and illustrate the ideas through
> use of hypothetical examples.  Either way, publishing the criteria used 
> to make the determination allows the community to judge if it's 
> arbitrary or not.

How can the community judge arbitrariness if the reasons for rejection 
of a specific candidate aren't disclosed?

IMNSHO, I'd prefer that the NomCom just verified that candidates meet 
the qualifications to run based on published criteria and disclose the 
reasons for any rejections.  If necessary the NomCom may need to go out 
and beat the bushes to find at least one qualified candidate for each 

Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay at impulse.net
Impulse Internet Service  -  http://www.impulse.net/
Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV

More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list