How much of the whole discussion could be covered by a more general requirement of "Avoid appearance of possible conflict of interest"? I think it is difficult to specify more exactly with the risk of lawyerly mis-interpretation. You're left with the problem of deciding who decides, but you have that problem anyway. Being more explicit about some kinds of conflicts doesn't help and may even make things worse..
On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 4:41 PM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The policy cited seems strange in multiple regards.
In regard to the LLC Board, the policy states that it applies to the
board, and then does not seem to say anything clear about what the
policy is for board members. Maybe I missed it? More likely, given
that most board members are also community participants (the extreme
case being the IETF Chair) I suspect that there is not much to say. So
don't claim the policy applies to them. Or put it more explicitly that
there is nothing to say about the board.
The restrictions on the RPC seem to go too far. While it is true that
most of the people who work for the RPC are not IETF participants, some
of them are. And they should be permitted to do so. And the current
person filling the role of RSE is also an active IETF participant and I
would not expect the LLC to prohibit him from participating in IETF
activities.
The only one that seems to be captured properly is the Contractors other
than Secretariat / RPC.
There is also the interesting complication that the RPC staffers have a
business relationship with the secretariat. We normally veyr much want
the Secretariat to stay out of IETF business. Is the distinction
between the RPC and AMS really that clear? My understanding is that at
least some of the RPC are employed by AMS?
Yours,
Joel
On 10/11/2020 7:23 PM, IETF Executive Director wrote:
> The IETF Administration LLC (IETF LLC) has drafted a proposed IETF LLC Community Engagement Policy [1] that sets out how IETF LLC board, staff and contractors will engage with the IETF community, including
>
> * what involvement board, staff and contractors may have in the the development of RFCs;
> * what engagement they may have with the NomCom;
> * How the IETF LLC seeks community feedback;
> * What mechanisms the IETF LLC uses for community engagement.
>
> The policy proposes a new mailing list ietf-admin@xxxxxxxx for the discussion of IETF LLC related matters.
>
> The IETF LLC now seeks community feedback on this proposed policy. Please provide feedback by 26 October 2020 00:00 UTC using any of the following methods:
>
> * Raising an issue on the Github repository [2]
> * Direct to the IETF Executive Director at exec-director@xxxxxxxx
> * Direct to the IETF LLC Board (not including the IETF Executive Director) at llc-board-only@xxxxxxxx
> * To the ietf@xxxxxxxx list
>
> [1] https://github.com/ietf-llc/community-engagement-policy-consultation/blob/master/DRAFT%20Community%20Engagement%20Policy.md
> [2] https://github.com/ietf-llc/community-engagement-policy-consultation/issues
>
