[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