For what it's worth, candidates in professional organizations (IEEE, ACM, say) routinely publish basic information about themselves, typically of two kinds:
* what have they done before (both within the organization as well as other roles) * vision for their position and the organization itself Both are typically space-limited (around 200 words, I think) to force focus and to avoid making this a "who can write a nicer autobiography" contest. This is not sufficient and doesn't replace personal knowledge or one-on-one interviews, but allows a broader range of people to comment. IEEE and ACM have member votes, so the need is a bit different, but I don't think this is that unusual nor particularly burdensome. Henning On Mar 6, 2013, at 4:37 PM, Eric Gray wrote: > Okay, thanks Bob. This makes sense... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Hinden [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2013 4:36 PM > To: Eric Gray > Cc: Bob Hinden; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Nomcom off in the wilderness: Transport AD > Importance: High > > Eric, > > On Mar 6, 2013, at 12:59 PM, Eric Gray wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> This confuses me. Are you saying that you would be more able to give >> feedback on someone you don't know if you knew what they might have to say >> about themselves? >> >> I would think that - if you don't know somebody - you can't give >> feedback on them (and that is precisely as it should be). > > If I don't recognize them by name (and we don't publish their pictures), I > might remember something they did in a working group/plenary/etc. by reading > their summary. > > Also, if they make statements about the future of the IETF that I agree with > or don't agree with, I can provide feedback on that. > > Bob > > >
