Re: [rfc-i] RSOC name

Hi Donald,

[I am sending the reply to the rfc-interest mailing list]

At 04:15 PM 7/29/2019, Donald Eastlake wrote:
>I don't think the IAB project model fits very well for the RFC Series
>and that it should have different governance for which I have some
>ideas. But I wanted to talk about something else: the power of

Yes.

>nomenclature.
>
>The key word in RFC Series Oversight Committee is "Oversight". What do
>people think when they hear "oversight"? They think that a large part
>the job of whoever has "oversight" is to review and criticize. No
>doubt the fine print clarifies things but every time someone thinks
>about or volunteers for or is appointed to the RSOC, it rings the
>"oversight" gong. Of course there are plenty of worse words than
>"oversight". I suppose it could have been called the RFC Series
>Management Committee or something...

About eight years, there was a thread about the RFC Editor 
model.  Olaf pointed out that the changes which were being proposed 
would move the RSE away from executive management.    I have not 
verified whether that ended up being what people agreed to.

I agree with the point which you made about "oversight".  The other 
side of the power is accountability, i.e. the Oversight Committee 
would be accountable for its decisions.  It is not the case here 
because of the way the committee appointments are made.

>What if everything else we the same, but it had been called the RFC
>Series Support Committee? And everytime someone thought about or
>volunteer for or was appointed to the committee they were reminded
>that this is about supporting the RFC Series?

It could be useful to have a reminder about the duties of the members 
of the committee.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy  

_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest