The concept of satisficing is useful.
There are many cases where a perfect control of a risk is counter-productive. The costs are greater than the rewards. The probability of a conflict is not very large to start with. The costs Yoav and others point to are real.
At the end of the day, the great defense against a hostile takeover of the IETF does not lie in organizational controls. The defense is that nobody is actually in charge of the Internet, not even us. We can publish an RFC mandating lawful intercept of every communication but that would not make it happen.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 2:00 PM Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 30 Jun 2020, at 18:03, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:On 30 Jun 2020, at 15:02, Salz, Rich <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
- “This" here is the use of employment as a poor approximation for what we should have which is a conflict of interest declaration.
I think that requiring a COI disclosure for all potential Nomcom members will shrink the pool. You can’t consider COI without looking at other factors.So it’s better to travel in hope that arrive?If there is a COI and this is more subtle than just who you are full time employed by, we should not take this into account?Checking a box is easy, so I did. Declaring that I work for Dell Technologies is also easy enough and public information enough, so I typed that in to the same form with the checkbox.Submitting a legal document disclosing all potential COI is more difficult. It’s probably better that I consult with the company lawyer first. The company lawyer would advise me to forget it. So I wouldn’t volunteer..Now that’s just me, but I don’t think my position is all that unique.Yoav
