On 4/28/2013 10:52 PM, Christian Huitema wrote:
Except that the IESG members select the wg chairs, which makes your
baseline stastistic suspect; it's too easy for all sorts of biasing
factors to sway the allocation of wg chair positions.
Mike actually mentioned that. Let's assume a simplified curriculum of
participant -> author/editor -> WG chair -> IESG, which more or less
reflects increasing seniority in the IETF. We may suspect that there
is bias that, at each step, privileges some candidates over others.
However, the mechanisms are different at each step.
Exactly. Complicated processes, needing high quality data that gets
complicated analysis, that we aren't well-enough trained to do well and
aren't going to be doing.
All of which is why we should limit our attempts to do numerical
analysis for this topic, and worry far more about the basics, including
such things as interaction (in)sensitivities, group tone and style, and
observable misbehaviors, all of which are likely to produce biasing results.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
