An academic/professional association exists to advance the interests of its members. Normally, at minimum, the president of such an association would hold the top degree in the relevant field. The President of the American Bar Association has a JD. The President of the American Medical Association has an MD, the President of the American Chemical Society has a PhD in Chemistry. It is normal for an association to elect someone at the top of their field academically to represent them. Obviously this person must have other skills as well to be an effective leader.
If you derisively refer to someone with a PhD in CS to be a "CS Nerd", don't join the ACM. The problem we have here is that the leadership of the ACM should be representing and advocating for the membership. The current leadership sees the membership as the problem. If you dare to talk about this, you get censored.
There are degrees beyond JD and MD for the legal and medical fields. JD and MD are just the minimum degrees necessary to practice in those fields. There is no such minimum degree for computing, and computing is a new enough field that many schools didn't even offer it as a major until recently.
Of course, Dr. Pancake has a PhD in a relevant field so your objection doesn't even apply to the candidates you listed.
Agreed. My point was that the experience listed is not directly related. But it's certainly true that significant experience elsewhere can provide useful perspective.
