W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-w3process@w3.org > December 2014

Re: ACTION REQUIRED: Call for Consensus: Proposed Process Change Regarding TAG Participation Rules; Respond by December 8, 2014

From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2014 08:36:31 -0800
Cc: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>, public-w3process@w3.org
Message-id: <39779381-0ABE-4DF5-8490-C64621B6A3C6@apple.com>
To: JC Verdié <jicheu@yahoo.fr>

> On Dec 11, 2014, at 5:31 , JC Verdié <jicheu@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> 
> It looks to me like there’s more than 1 people supporting the proposed change, but there’s so much noise that it’s hard to tell if the others “don’t care”, “can live with or without” or are strongly opposed.

I *think* we have 

* support from a plurality (a conveniently vague word, as I am unsure how many, but it’s more than one)
* opposition from Chaals (details coming, I understand; I think he prefers the status quo)
* and I think we have “would prefer more but can live with it” from a plurality, but I am not sure.  Pretty sure that this is Dan’s position, not so sure about Sam and Daniel.

> 
> I am strongly *against* any change that would allow, on a permanent basis, many people from the same company. For the simple reason that even if we elect individuals and not corporations, I do not live in Candyland, and sadly, because of this, I have to take measures and act accordingly.
> 
> Regards
> JC
> 
> 
>> On 10 Dec 2014, at 20:09, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 10, 2014, at 9:57 , Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 10/12/14 18:31, Linss, Peter wrote:
>>>> I am also strongly in favor of the change. It's a small but reasonable step.
>>>> 
>>>> Frankly I'm inclined to remove the restriction entirely, I don't see it
>>>> helping anything.
>>> 
>>> Agreed 100%. I heard so many times we're electing individuals and
>>> not Members but we put Member-based restrictions on these individuals.
>>> It makes, from my perspective, strictly no sense. Get the best ones,
>>> period.
>> 
>> I think we have been around this several times, and thrashed it to death, but 
>> 
>> * even with the best of intentions, people are affected by their corporate culture, viewpoint, and colleagues
>> * some companies are, in fact, quite directive: it’s hard not to do what your boss tells you to do
>> * if someone has to choose whether to lean towards supporting their employer (who pays their salary) or a clean ‘best for the web’, I think they’ll find it hard not to try to convince themselves that leaning towards their employer’s viewpoint is at least acceptable
>> 
>> People are good but not perfect. In another context, I might think, for example, I am sensitive to racism and sexism but I am also aware I am, in fact, a white male. We seek diversity because of the unconscious biases, the blind spots, lacunae, and so on. I think the same is true here. It’s prudent.
>> 
>> David Singer
>> Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
>> 
>> 
> 

David Singer
Manager, Software Standards, Apple Inc.
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2014 16:37:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:51:25 UTC