On 28 Jul 2019, at 20:27, Martin Thomson wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2019, at 07:21, Pete Resnick wrote:
It seems to me there's a pretty wide chasm between "completely
opaque"
and "micromanaging", so I'm curious about your thought that the
complete
opacity "is a very good thing". In particular, if the IAB is
accountable
(and I believe it is and should be), it's got to have at least some
knowledge of what's going on at a high level. That to me means that
the
IAB not only reviews the minutes of RSOC meetings like the rest of us
do, but also gets regular briefings from the RSOC so there can be
some
Q&A about minutes.
The idea, at least as far I understand it, was that the two IAB
members on the RSOC were entrusted with ensuring that information was
relayed to the IAB as a whole. So, while the analogy is neat, it's not
really a black box. Information was flowing, but it might have been
that there was some problem with getting the right level of
information.
What you say is more encouraging than how Melinda had framed it; not
ideal, in that perhaps the right info was not coming through, but still
better than "completely opaque". That said, I've heard intimations
offline that some folks (on the IAB and on the RSOC) thought that the
IAB was meant to purposely treat the RSOC as a black box. If your view
is the held view across the IAB and the RSOC, that's good, and perhaps
just information flow needs to be adjusted. If not, perhaps others might
say why they feel differently.
pr
--
Pete Resnick http://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
