|
On 7/29/2019 3:43 PM, Pete Resnick
wrote:
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.
This seems to be at odds with what Ted said:
As I noted above, the RSOC generally operates independently
of the IAB. The current documents call out specific times
when the IAB must approve the actions of the RSOC,
particularly this:
For all decisions that affect the RSE individually (e.g., hiring and
firing), the RSOC prepares recommendations for the IAB, but the final
decision is the responsibility of the IAB. For instance the RSOC
would do the following:
o perform annual reviews of the RSE and report the result of these
reviews to the IAB.
o manage RSE candidate selection and advise the IAB on candidate
appointment (in other words, select the RSE subject to IAB
approval).
The IAB treats these approvals as it does confirmations of the
IESG slate for NomCom appointments. We don't re-run the
process, we confirm that the process ran as described.
The above coupled with the "personnel decisions are executive
session matters and are not to be shared" comments from Ted leads
back to the black box model. (e.g. not sure how you can confirm
the process if you don't have the details on what the actual
discussion was).
At this point, I'm still looking to understand "why" it
happened, and "who" caused it to happen.
Later, Mike
pr
|
