Dave Crocker wrote: > The proper model for such an environment is that everyone > who participates is biased and has an agenda. Dave, thanks for engaging in this important topic. We all expect bias in standards organizations -- indeed it is a irreducible factor in science and engineering and all human endeavors (and particularly so in my profession, law!). I don't think anyone here is naïve about that. Please don't demand more than is possible out of an ethics policy. But also please don't give up the moral high ground just because we all fall short of moral perfection. There is a middle way: Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest that allows each of us to judge those biases for ourselves. We should be expected to sign our contributions and disclose our potential biases and conflicts of interest. Then the buyers will have reason to trust the sellers. /Larry -----Original Message----- From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 10:46 AM To: lrosen@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Author disclosures and conflict of interest On 4/20/2014 10:18 AM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: > Such a disclosure requirement would further encourage everyone to > trust and implement IETF specifications. Probably not. Although the IETF has participation from the full range of academia, research-ia, and industry, it's really and industry-driven environment, since successful output of the IETF results in products and services. The proper model for such an environment is that everyone who participates is biased and has an agenda. Seriously. Expecting anything is frankly naive. What mitigates that realistic view is balance among competing biases and competing goals, and of course transparency in the processes and in the details of what is produced. Intellectual property is really the only area of potential opacity that should (and does) concern us. Trust in IETF work comes from timely utility, not abstract disclosures. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net