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

[Farell Folly]

Indeed Farzaneh, this is a new opportunity for the members to react on this
document and suggests some improvments. I was very honored to work on the
Netiquette and Events proposal submissions procedures, and will be happy to
help on any question regarding those two sections of the Procedures doc.

Le mar. 1 août 2017 à 22:55, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> a
écrit :

> 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_KVOgPdjl3wB_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
>
-- 
Regards
@__f_f__
https://www.linkedin.com/in/farellf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20170804/cd51fc10/attachment.html>