Re: [Rfced-future] Welcome to the RFC Editor Future Development Program

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

Hiya,

On 01/04/2020 23:23, John C Klensin wrote:
> a few of us
> think that part of what got us into this situation was assuming that
> the RSE was just another contractor who could be evaluated,

I reckon there's a real element of truth there and I'm
myself quite happy to be open about my opinion that it
is not a good plan for the RSE to be considered to be
"just another contractor." That may be down to a love of
books or some such irrelevant bias of course - I am not
claiming my opinion here is soundly justifiable;-)

That said, there are some IETF participants for whom I
have a lot of respect, who, I think, do in fact consider
the RSE role as one to be filled by "just another
contractor," or maybe they'd describe it differently,
perhaps by stating that the person in the RSE role is
not guaranteed to be a god-like being or some such.

I hope this process can find a way to deal with such
divergent views, or find a role description with which
we are all equally unhappy, but with which we can all
live;-(

Cheers,
S.