- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 16:09:10 +0200
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
On Apr 24, 2012, at 15:01 , Larry Masinter wrote: > We can’t wait on security. No, we can't. I tried to bring it up in http://www.w3.org/mid/FA3C1458-84E1-4B03-BC01-08426A0C2097@berjon.com but it didn't elicit much interest. > I didn’t come up with anyone willing to nominate anyone, or willing to run. I know of people who would be willing to run but wouldn't bother because in the current cronies-of-the-AC system they wouldn't stand a chance. > It sounds nice to say that you want to offer more “open” discussion during TAG elections. But as with most things, every perceived benefit also has a cost. > > • Making TAG elections more like the political election circus, full of innuendo and character assassination, doesn’t seem like it would increase the attractiveness. I don't know which standards you've been involved in but what you describe there just isn't the community I know. Things do occasionally get nasty, but it's certainly not the norm. > • Statements made during the election period should carry less weight, not more, than someone’s record as a participant in open standards deliberations. In a perfect world, sure. And AC reps who have sufficient breadth of community involvement to know about this can act on it. But in reality, most don't. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 14:09:47 UTC