[NCSG-PC] SSC process and my status in NCSG PC

avri doria avri at acm.org
Fri Apr 7 07:32:46 EEST 2017


Hi,

I might add that I see no problem with continuing for a while with just
2 members in the SSC.  That is one of the advantages of the SSC
requiring full consensus.

But I do recommend you do not try to design new processes until you
really know why the previous, relatively simple and straightforward
process failed.

avri


On 06-Apr-17 23:58, Rafik Dammak wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First, I want to thank Matt for the work he has done and I am really
> confused that he had to resign in such way. I m really thankful that
> as vice-chair took the lead to handling the SSC selection.
>
> With regard to SSC, I kept myself away from the discussion since I
> recused myself. However, I do feel guilty that the burden for process
> setting and selection was put on other members and Matt as vice-chair.
>
> I cannot accept to be appointed to SSC due to the circumstances and I
> am more than keen to withdraw my candidature and restart the process
> based on the comments.
> I think this is an opportunity to work on a solid process and
> procedure to handle appointments. The PC has several additional items
> to work on including the ongoing public comments, request for inputs
> received by some working groups and vice chairs appointments.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2017-04-07 4:54 GMT+09:00 Stephanie Perrin
> <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
> <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>>:
>
>     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:
>
>         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. 
>         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.
>
>         As such, I can no longer manage this selection process nor can
>         I recommend that it continue to pick the third remaining SSC
>         member.   I do not believe the process should go forward as
>         is; it should be restarted with much clearer parameters and
>         procedural rules and policies.  
>
>     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.
>
>     Kind regards, Stephanie
>
>     On 2017-04-06 15:10, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>>     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 (stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca
>>     <mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>) wrote:
>>
>>>     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:
>>>>     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 <http://linkedin.com/in/ferdeline> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>     <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>     -------- 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: ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info <mailto:ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info>
>>>>>     To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>
>>>>>
>>>>>     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
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     NCSG-PC mailing list
>>     NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc>
>     _______________________________________________ NCSG-PC mailing
>     list NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is <mailto:NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is>
>     https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>     <https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc> 
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus




More information about the NCSG-PC mailing list