Transparency (Re: STRAW PROPOSAL RFC Editor charter)

[Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no>]

Carl Malamud wrote:
> Hi Brian -
>
> I agree with the first part ("seek multiple proposals when possible
> and appropriate").  However, we may disagree on the last part ("transparent
> as possible").  My formulation would be "transparent" without the
> qualifier.  Transparent with a qualifier == opaque.
>
> The more opaque the leadership is, the harder it is to keep keep a system 
> in place where anybody can participate, including participation by email 
> (one of our hallmarks).
Carl,

I disagree with your assertion.

Transparency is an important tool - but it is a tool, not the mission.

There are instances where one has to choose between transparency and 
other valuable properties, like making the process work at all, or 
making it possible to make the process work in a manner acceptable to 
the laws of the land.

I would definitely not want a stronger statement than "as transparent as 
possible".

               Harald


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf