<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p><font size="+1"><font face="Lucida Grande">This is not a case of
washing dirty laundry in my view. It is of resolving how we
fix what was clearly a breakdown in process. I am concerned
that we learn from this experience, set in place better
procedures, and establish trust again. If I thought simply
accepting Ed's withdrawal from the process and simply naming
Rafik would effectuate a change in our collective behaviour, I
would certainly opt for that, because like everyone else, I
have a rather full agenda at the moment and this has taken an
inordinate amount of time. However, as Ayden has indicated, I
think it leaves Rafik as a lame duck in the position. And as
Matthew indicated in his post this morning:</font></font></p>
<blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">Over the past two weeks, and increasingly
over the past week, the legitimacy of the selection process has
been questioned, the effort undermined and my integrity and the
integrity of those I have worked with in this process has been
denigrated.<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>The
backtalk, rumors, unpleasant lobbying and influencing, etc., go
far beyond what is acceptable and reinforce the difficulties
that I and my colleagues are operating under.<o:p></o:p></p>
As such, I can no longer manage this selection process nor can I
recommend that it continue to pick the third remaining SSC member.<span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span><span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> </span>I do not believe the process
should go forward as is; it should be restarted with much clearer
parameters and procedural rules and policies.<span
style="mso-spacerun:yes"> <br>
</span></blockquote>
<font size="+1">You recused yourself from this process Tapani, you
have not been subject to the chaos that ensued. I think it is
inappropriate for you to accuse me of "washing dirty laundry",
when all I am trying to do is respond to what I think are
thoughtful concerns raised by some of the unfortunate few who have
had to live through this experience. Perhaps we should just wait
for a week or two until things calm down a bit to investigate how
we can select our third member of the committee.<br>
<br>
Kind regards, Stephanie</font><span style="mso-spacerun:yes"></span><br>
<span style="mso-spacerun:yes"></span>
<blockquote><span style="mso-spacerun:yes"></span></blockquote>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2017-04-06 15:10, Tapani Tarvainen
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:20170406191013.2hxx3zru7ldex5qo@tarvainen.info"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ayden and Stephanie,
I take it you two are objecting to appointing Rafik without washing
the dirty laundry in public first.
As I indicated I don't see the need or use of that - not all hasty
words need to be avenged, victories don't need to include shaming
losers, not everything needs to be said out loud. And the real issue
at hand is not really all that big: sky would not fall regardless of
who we appoint to the SSC. But if we don't have a consensus then we
don't.
So, unless I've misunderstood you, I guess we'll have to start the
process over.
Perhaps we should first elect a new Vice Chair to take care of it.
Tapani
On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 09:49:43AM -0400, Stephanie Perrin (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca">stephanie.perrin@mail.utoronto.ca</a>) wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I agree with Ayden that this mess needs to be resolved; he has stated the
issues well.
Stephanie
On 2017-04-06 06:17, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I do not have an objection to Rafik serving on the SSC, just as I did
not have an objection to Ed serving. I had not assessed either candidate
and was reserving judgement until our scheduled call for this evening,
when I was going to compare CVs against the publicly-developed scoring
rubric. However, if I am interpreting correctly the previous emails
which have been sent to this list today, some of us have just been
accused of being biased and partial towards a certain candidate, and
“this whole process is a mess and should be started over with clear
requirements and standards approved by the PC.” Then an hour later, we
should abandon process altogether, “There is an old tradition in my
culture, well I just made it up, that all new jobs go to the newlywed
man.” So which is it? Should we be starting over, putting out a new call
for candidates with a clearly defined process for how applications will
be evaluated — or is there actually a tacit acknowledgement that the
process we were following was appropriate, but there was a fear the
‘wrong’ person was going to be chosen? I hate to dwell on this, as I’d
like us to move on as well, but I think this is important. If Rafik is
appointed because Ed has withdrawn, I do not want his appointment to be
seen by any as illegitimate.
Ayden Férdeline
linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline"><http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline></a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [NCSG-PC] SSC process and my status in NCSG PC
Local Time: 6 April 2017 11:02 AM
UTC Time: 6 April 2017 10:02
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info">ncsg@tapani.tarvainen.info</a>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is">ncsg-pc@lists.ncsg.is</a>
Dear all,
As Ed has now withdrawn and the group of PC members reviewing
candidates earlier placed Kris Seeburn on the last place,
it would seem appointing Rafik now is an easy choice.
So let's do that.
As Matt earlier set deadline for the appointment tomorrow, I would
suggest we wait for 24 hours for any objections from PC members, and
if there are none by then, notify the SSC of our selection.
I would also like to suggest we forego further discussion of the
process for time being, it isn't likely to be useful until things
have calmed down a bit. But let's put it on the task list of the PC to
develop processes for handling this kind of situations in the future
more gracefully.
Tapani
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
NCSG-PC mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is">NCSG-PC@lists.ncsg.is</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc">https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>