[rfc-i] Wordsmithing Re: Candidates for RSOC sought

Andrew Sullivan ajs at shinkuro.com
Mon Feb 28 14:02:14 PST 2011


On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 04:19:37PM -0500, Dave CROCKER wrote:

> What is the basis for believing that I will apply it for myself in the 
> same way that you will apply it for yourself?  What is the basis for even 
> guessing the details of application for anyone?

There is no basis for believing that different people's judgement will
always yield the same conclusion under otherwise the same
circumstances.  You appear to want an algorithm to guarantee results
under a given input.  I don't think it's as useful as I believe you
think.  In particular, I think it will end up disqualifying the very
people we want to have involved.  I also think it will turn out to be
too narrow, because I think that in the cases that really matter,
someone determined will be able to follow a specific rule precisely
while still doing things many of us find deplorable.  (I would
speculate here about rule ethics vs virtue ethics and the public
policy implications of the decline of the latter, but I fear I'm
already far enough afield from what anyone finds interesting.)

> >>       An RSOC member must recuse themselves from RSOC review and approval
> >> of any issue about which they have been active.
> >
> > I think this rule deeply wrong.  Taken quite literally, it means that
> > every RSOC member will be by definition unqualified to evaluate
> > anything that comes before them.
>
> You think that all RSOC members will have been 'active' in all RFC Editor 
> policy efforts?

The present discussion seems to attract a tiny number of participants.
It seems to me that it involves several policy issues about the
oversight of the RSE and what the RSE's priorities ought to be.  Your
rule as I read it would mean that all the people who have been active
in this discussion are all automatically disqualified to make any
decision on those issues -- effectively, to make any decision on
anything the RSOC needs to do in the near future.  I think that would
be a bad thing.

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at shinkuro.com
Shinkuro, Inc.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list