[NCUC-DISCUSS] A note from the Executive Committee - On Transparency and NomCom Selection Process

[Karel Douglas]

Thanks Farzi,

It is refreshing to see your openness in dealing with a topic like this
that can be abused. There needs to be balance  - too much transparency can
be just as bad as too little!

Karel


On 1 August 2017 at 17:54, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear NCUC members,
>
>
> Thanks to everyone for having engaged in a robust discussion on this
> latest nomination. Since the question of transparency has been raised, we
> thought it best to respond regarding our thought process, and the road
> ahead.
>
> As many on this list have noted, transparency is of the utmost importance
> in these processes. The community needs to be confident that the process
> was fair, honest and accountable. We take this responsibility seriously. As
> others have also noted, there are competing considerations that need to be
> carefully balanced as part of these processes. These include the ability of
> the EC to openly and honestly express their views about candidates,
> discussing their weaknesses as well as their strengths. It is also worth
> noting that often the candidates for these positions are our respected
> colleagues. The process requires that EC members be able to discuss their
> preferences frankly, without worrying that their remarks will lead to
> personal animosity down the line. Another important consideration is that
> we want to structure the process in a way that encourages candidates to
> run. Having our assessments of their strengths and weaknesses made public
> could be an unpleasant experience for potential candidates, discouraging
> them from seeking positions.
>
> These considerations were much less of an issue in this case, as we were
> fortunate enough to have two outstanding candidates, either of whom would
> have made an excellent NomCom rep - but they are principles of general
> importance. So how should these considerations be balanced against our
> fundamental responsibility to execute a transparent and accountable
> process, and one which inspires confidence among the membership of the NCUC?
>
> Ultimately, the path forward depends on you - the community. For those who
> have raised calls for more transparency - your timing could not be better.
> We are currently in the midst of a consultation on our revised operating
> procedures, which includes protocols on this very issue. We agree that
> there needs to be more clarification on how these processes are handled
> next time, and we invite you all to weigh in, either here or, preferably,
> in the draft consultation document, available at:
>  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uolqcYivX_KVOgPdjl3w
> B_aBkHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/edit#heading=h.1x7lfonwlklh
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uolqcYivX_KVOgPdjl3wB_aBkHyLcFkvzNsNU47BRQY/edit#heading=h.1x7lfonwlklh>
>
> So tell us - how can we improve things?
>
>
> NCUC Executive Committee
>
> Renata Acquino Ribeiro
> David Cake
> Farzaneh Badii
> Michael Karanikolas
> Tatiana Tropina
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170801/a9e1b5c9/attachment.html>