Picking a new member - process

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

NOTE this is to the public list.

So, I think the picking a new member conversation seems to be mostly
done, and I think further relevant information isn't likely to be
forthcoming.

It's not clear whether we have consensus, but in any case rather than
try to come up with a consensus on a single name I think in the
interests of transparency it's probably best not to just come up out
of the conclave with a single name to rubber-stamp.

So we should hold a public vote.

On the other hand I see no reason to list on the ballot candidates
that no existing TC member feels we should be voting on.  Doing so
makes the slight to those candidates more formal and obvious.

So I suggest the following process:

 1. Someone sends a proposal to start off the public ctte nominations
    period.  (Formally, they are proposing a TC resolution.)  For a
    period of two weeks we will take public nominations from TC
    members of any candidates they think should be on the ballot.

 2. We will then vote.  The ballot will have each candidate on it,
    plus Further Discussion.

FD will do double duty as RON.  Placing a candidate below FD doesn't
necessarily mean that they are unacceptable, just that the TC member
would like to further explore their strengths and weaknesses before
making a decision.

Ian.

Draft/template:

  Intro, common to all non-FD options:

  1. The Technical Committee thanks all the candidates who put
     themselves forward for the vacant TC seat.

  2. We appreciate the opportunity to select from a strong field of
     candidates.

  Option Alice:

  3. We propose to the DPL that Alice Jones should be appointed
     to the TC.  (Constitution 6.2(2))

Ian.