From: Rakesh Bhandari (rakeshb@STANFORD.EDU)
Date: Mon May 17 2004 - 21:16:41 EDT
I am talking about you (single-) handled admissions before there was an advisory committee. Which is relevant since the AC seems to be defunct. RB >Re the list procedure re admissions: > >We don't make or discuss recommendations on the list in fairness to the >people being recommended. However, I can explain again the >list procedure. > >The procedure begins when a list member makes a recommendation to >a member of the AC or myself. It is then shared with the other members. >We then discuss the question. In some cases, we agree that someone else >on the list should be asked for an opinion. Our discussions are speeded >when we all know the person being recommended and especially when >the member making a recommendation provides sufficient motivation, >documentation and references for the proposed candidate. If any >member wants to make a recommendation, then I strongly urge them >to motivate the candidate as fully as possible and to at least provide >us with an email address for that person. I also strongly encourage >them to read the criteria that we use when considering recommendations >(explained in the report noted below) and to speak to those criteria >when making recommendations. > >Our discussions _can_ take time, especially if one of the 2-3 AC members >or myself is on vacation or attending a conference, etc. A certain >time lag is the price you pay when a ctte makes decisions by consensus. >In the end, we make a decision on the basis of consensus. We sometimes >have disagreements (as is to be expected) but no one has ever officially >"blocked" consensus to prevent someone from being admitted and >no one ever threatened to resign if someone was either not invited _or_ >invited. > >The criteria that we use in considering recommendations, and our entire >admissions policy, is spelled out in detail in a statement by the AC to >the list sent on April 10, 2002 [OPE-L:6958]. Our admissions procedure >is therefore quite transparent. > >When an invitation is made it can sometimes be months before someone >gets back to us. After all, the people being invited can also be away >from their email for months at a time if they are on vacation or >attending conferences, etc. Sometimes people are invited and they never >reply. It happens. > >All of this is time-consuming. The members of the AC, including past >member Alfredo, deserve a lot of credit for the time and effort that >they have devoted to this process. One should remember that all of this >activity by the AC and myself is unpaid activity. I think the list >should be grateful for the administrative service(s) that we perform for >the list. > >After someone makes a recommendation, whether we get back to the >person making the recommendation is a matter of discretion. We >have no firm policy about that. More often, after a recommendation >goes before the AC for consideration, the first the original person who >made the recommendation hears about what happened is when >s/he reads the welcoming message. Of course, there is nothing which >prevents a list member who has made a recommendation from asking >an AC member or myself _off-list_ for a status report. > >In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 18 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT