[rfc-i] RSOC oversight role
Dave CROCKER
dhc at dcrocker.net
Wed Feb 16 08:01:35 PST 2011
On 2/16/2011 7:48 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> Having said that, I do not think it is useful or consistent with our ethos to
> prohibit the RSOC members from participating as individuals in the discussions
> which lead to the policy formation. There is some strangeness, but it is a
> strangeness we do all the time.
A judge may not also be one of the advocacy attorneys in a case.
If you write an article or a book, you are less likely to be good at proof-reading.
There are cognitive psych reasons that conflict of interest can be a problem.
That is, beyond issues of crass benefit, having an 'investment' in the details
tends to affect one's ability to provide detached review (oversight).
In-depth involvement creates in-depth bias.
That interferes with the ability to provide meta-review, which is the essence of
oversight.
Are we so short on resources that we need people to be doing these fundamentally
different jobs?
d/
ps. This issue also peppers working groups, in which chairs have a reduced
ability to facilitate sometimes challenging working group process because they
have also be acting as an individual contributor.
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
More information about the rfc-interest
mailing list