I concur with what others have said about the lack of a bright line between authoring and contributing. And for this specific purpose, there should be no difference.
The distinction I was trying to make here is between those who interact/negotiate with the RPC about drafts that are in the process of becoming RFCs and those who don’t. I’ll assume that distinction is also mistaken unless I hear otherwise.
a. Prohibit RPC staff from *authoring* non-RPC drafts (not contributing to, just authoring).
b. Prohibit any RPC staff that author a non-RPC draft from any processing or discussion of that draft in their RPC role.
c. No restrictions at all.
I prefer option c, with the caveat that perhaps the RPC member shouldn’t edit their own draft when it comes back to the RPC.
That’s basically what I was getting at with b.
I have trouble imagining how an RPC staff member having offering RPC related opinions on a work-in-process draft would not, on the balance, do more good than harm.
I agree, my question was about RPC staff offering non-RPC related opinions.
thanks again
Jay
