Hi, I started a second thread, mostly so that when I replied, you'd understand that I'm trying to broadly reply to the points I feel need addressing, and not to 1 specific person. I also agree with a previous comment that the IAB has delegated the RSE responsibility to the RSOC and the RSOC doesn't need to be micromanaged in that process, as there are ample feedback loops (there are 2 IAB members, 1 IESG member, the interim director on the RSOC directly, and we communicate with the IAB and LLC as well), but it's my style to be as transparent as I can be. Contract extension concerns --- As Alexander and Ted pointed out, the language of the contract states that contract runs in blocks of 2 years, and be extended twice, before mandatorily going out to bid again. It's also worth pointing out that since Heather started as RSE, the RSOC did run through the contract process with her one full time (she was RSE, the RSOC recommended that we extend and the contract did extend 2 more times, for a total of 6 years) - and then the RSE function went out to bid again. Heather/Spherical Cow Consulting bid, and Heather is now RSE again. What happened here is mostly no different; she was awarded the contract the second time around, and with the first term of 2 years coming to an end, the RSOC recommended to re-up that contract for another 2 years. That would have brought us to 4 years. The difference here is that the RSOC decided proactively to recommend to put the contract out to bid again. Let me address the RSOC's thinking in "why", and share with you a tidbit about Heather. When I joined the RSOC in 2014, Heather introduced herself to me, and shared an overview of what she does, how she fits into the RSOC, and shared general information. She also, that very first meeting, raised her concerns over being the only bidder on the contract; what happens if she didn't bid again? What happens if she's the only bidder? What happens when she's ready to retire? Heather was proactively thinking ahead about succession planning and what was best for the RSE role and the community as a whole, even though she was fully committed to the job, she was looking to make sure the transition was as easy as it could be, for both the new RSE and the community, down the road. That was 5 years ago, and I think that says a lot about Heather's character and her professionalism and her commitment to the role. As I've pointed out, we did indeed go through a second RFP process wherein Heather was awarded the contract. However, we didn't receive any other bids for the role, and that was a concern to both Heather as an RSE, and the RSOC. I hope the reason why is obvious.. what happens if she were (quite unlikely, knock on wood) to be hit by the proverbial bus? What would we do? Fast forward to the end of 2018/current, where the RSOC has been largely reseated, and the new members on the RSOC are heading that we only had 1 bidder. There were the typical questions around the process, how did we do it, where did we post it, how long, did we advertise in the right places, with the right text, etc. The RSOC came to the conclusion that 1. we wanted to recommend to rebid the RFP earlier, which would not preclude Heather from bidding as well, specifically to address and alleviate those concerns and 2. that the rebid expressly had NOTHING to do with Heather's performance, and was not a comment on her. We certainly understood that bidding early could be construed in a way we didn't intend, and we did our best to communicate that it was not the RSOC's intention to do anything other than address the "single bidder" concern. It should be pointed out that the RSOC is empowered to make a recommendation; we do not award the contract, but my understanding is it would be in the purview of the LLC to put it out to bid early, if it decided to do so. Odds & Ends --- I too am concerned at the amount of speculation, but I also understand that this seems to be troubling to the community as a whole, something I personally have a lot of sympathy for. To John's point, the RSOC is seated (and reseated) at the pleasure of the IAB (RFC6635, Section 3.1, 3.1.1). The RSOC does NOT award the contract; does NOT formally extend the contract - remember, the RSOC makes recommendations with regards to the contract(s). We are required to oversee the RSE and ensure the Series is run in an open and transparent manner, and includes feedback from the community. Speaking for myself, while we are appointed to the RSOC by the IAB, and can be removed at any time by the IAB, I certainly feel we are accountable to the community, just like the IAB is, or the IESG is, or any of the rest of us are as participants; we certainly have a duty to include the community and protect the community interests. Speaking for myself, not as RSOC chair, I strongly reject any notion that we are NOT accountable to the community. That's part of why the IAB and the RSOC decided to send the note yesterday, and we're following up today. I will answer any question that I can. I will point out though, that the RSOC was specifically signalling that the attempt to rebid was NOT a comment on Heather's performance at all. Thanks, Sarah
