Re: [Rfced-future] Model proposal

["Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>]

We keep a lawyer on retainer.
So the difference becomes that we are looking for someone who will be
- more engaged in understanding and helping direct the community (the 
lawyers explicit do not direct)
- have more ongoing activities, although quite possibly less than heretofore

Sounds like you are actually arguing for a senior, respected, 
contractor.  With a long term relationship.

Yours,
Joel

On 7/7/2020 6:18 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 3:11 PM Brian E Carpenter 
> <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>      > Sorry, I should have been more clear. I think this is a proper
>     subject for IESG and IAB consideration, made somewhat more difficult
>     by anchoring on a historical five author limit that had (at least to
>     me) a fairly unclear rationale.
> 
>     Absolutely I think that community discussion and rough consensus is
>     appropriate for this and other strategy or policy issues. My concern
>     is that this needs to be facilitated and informed by someone with
>     relevant knowledge and experience in the
>     editing/publishing/library/archival world and that is not us.
> 
> 
> Stipulating for the moment that this is true, I don't really see how you 
> get from there to "and this person needs to be in charge of the 
> process". To give an example that I think I also gave on the most recent 
> virtual call, we often have to do things that require a bunch of 
> relevant expertise in the legal world, and that's not us, but address 
> that problem by engaging a lawyer and asking their opinion. Why doesn't 
> that work here?
> 
> -Ekr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>