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

Bob Hinden bob.hinden at gmail.com
Tue Mar 1 00:53:20 PST 2011


>> 
> 
> 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.


I agree.  To say it a different way, I don't think we don't want to be excluding people from the oversight process who actually know something what they are providing oversight for.  Most people who know something, have opinions about it.  

I think the reason someone needs to recuse themselves is for something that is hidden from public view such as a relationship with a company who might benefit from a decision.  The conflicts we should worry about are the ones that are not visible.  We should not be asking people to recuse themselves because they contributed to a discussion or even originally proposed a policy.  Other members of the oversight committee can see this and take it into account.

If people who know something about the topic have to recuse themselves, the RSOC isn't going to be providing very much actual oversight.

Bob




More information about the rfc-interest mailing list