IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Draft IAB conflict of interest policy

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Mon, 13 January 2020 23:38 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F26FD120020 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:38:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZULyeYYmx8tt for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:38:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06F1C12001B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:38:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id i11so11769919ioi.12 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:38:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=YEt3B2YhrUh0gJU5LW+clyyyWtARRchApKZvZiMrkgw=; b=OzUwLMjO9vDoWqQzkdtTP7zCq22VFsRu3r1ZQUYyu1jKKI4ZSDyORJpIJhCNjLD0zN ZFr8mzQJsjC9W6RrYhJcSzLS8UFlWdUsGG7i+4ebNf/uIJMbU4Lfdp3fqhfo9hNAUXAO jTXRTm57wTtT83QBWJHi0bwi4i6AoTe3fn9ukgZ7YtatOa6eUalh45NfclHIbNVI6Hk8 mmevkEA4i/Z/6JACphK7PSNPO8q8bgR3nWb5Y7TAFu0If68S4/rZW+ZVq/oooi0EEKT7 3Nix/nGT+NECcyifrSWfpnfXBaMGKzFnxtKTj39eDXXPYjVEU4qPbnPo9rEcafNgcjdJ j4lQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YEt3B2YhrUh0gJU5LW+clyyyWtARRchApKZvZiMrkgw=; b=sAbklAuoYoPomS4NJn4y2J5/TL3Yf5uOTP3AD2ufYAzkFwqCuok/zNm4m1WVur+tx8 BN6ZBoZInLDG+za0FH6XeLn1pwSPswjK31QruuEKyb2ySOwq9WT9Etgv+Ohp8JMx2Szh qctIriAQ60EIhgnL15xcZn3rKWDkjP7gxACloFbZsHWiIC+0mqgKpY09m2uOsobCw6VG z2Sx3brZixi7cFbfpr211b7HjGGrUWJjw7/x//WBnuvl+uIK9c/BgSWzWs/oiUdQwsSL SCuAZz9vJfanhQca/c8+7n1j0YtfM+HOn19ZI7210eu3uggiFq5NhpghGHY1d8VZu247 YSKw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVY+hk3Au++wt3+pJL0VXfHGAz/3AgOLwJ/DiGfuRHYqLWjAr43 wXViKJ+0XNCNXlkFTWUaFrORMZkZEueik32+am4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzKHcEYI5ZUfMnJLTCKlNPJRvlZyZ5ZWwDznKUZ8EUrOd2HMPFYGNorEPVkUlNv9keUBzXfaS9zvd1D4O44vLA=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:3ece:: with SMTP id s197mr16172184jas.30.1578958730392; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:38:50 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4e888f0a-a1e8-df72-cbbc-9a2e2f0d0d05@iab.org> <CAL02cgTOAEH43zs-CjCSs64gTre65eXrSfNOBXCWDFYyfMkLvg@mail.gmail.com> <89f2653c-4333-665b-51b3-c4a860a78288@comcast.net> <f2ed5cf4-001b-1822-460d-4b4a1e2a597f@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <f2ed5cf4-001b-1822-460d-4b4a1e2a597f@joelhalpern.com>
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 15:38:37 -0800
Message-ID: <CAChr6SyLXReyu_kAb609O4YuYKAM_6rQV2pOnK4imVwCrdAe9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Draft IAB conflict of interest policy
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000003d77eb059c0dfa3b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-0fsFkXJPEqOPQnxHTn0oJurUGM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 23:38:56 -0000

On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 11:44 AM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
wrote:

> Yes, We do ask that folks disclose their primary affiliation.  I believe
> we ask that for WG chairs, for ADs, and for IAB members.  That gives the
> community the information about the situation.  That is VERY different
> from asking folks not to participate in leadership decisions about work
> that may affect their employer.
>

That often gives "the community the information about the situation", but
not always.

The classic case is the "consulting firm" that only gets paid via defense
or other government contracts.

I'm not sure that's a solvable problem, but I do agree that's different
from a non-participation request.

thanks,
Rob

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email