W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2014

Re: Forced Resignation

From: Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2014 00:54:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CANr5HFUxjJBbhVpDL-Pgafktm8hW5WVm9OuLVTtTP5tadypdKQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Cc: "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>, Robin Berjon <robin@w3.org>, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
On 2 Jul 2014 10:26, "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net> wrote:
>
> Alex Russell wrote:
> >
> > Surely we can't take arguments of the form "X hasn't happened, our
> > preventative measures against X work!" seriously without *at least*
> > weighing the counterfactual.
> >
>
> Those promulgating a view that "X hasn't happened" *despite* said
> preventative measures, are the ones failing to weigh the counter-
> factual.

This is childish logic. I clearly stated the harm: we lose productive TAG
members, seemingly at random, thanks to a policy choice.

You haven't described why this harm isn't real or why it is lesser than the
thing your preferred policy guards against.

Further, I noted that the TAG invites former members to meetings and asked
the AB/AC to reconcile the policy objectives with the current operating
norms.

To sustain the argument that the current structure "avoids capture" you
need to bring an argument about why harm isn't caused by collegial
attendance norms but is averted through membership restrictions that affect
*the same people*.

I welcome such a debate but do not find one in any of your messages so far.

> > To do otherwise would invite superstition and error.
> >
>
> Nice argument both ways. ;-)
>
> >
> > Do you *have reason* to think the TAG policy effective and/or net
> > good? On what evidence?
> >
>
> What evidence do YOU have that it's an ineffective policy, other than
> your personal bias as a TAG member affected by it?

I cited it in the OP.

Further, we'd be deprived of either Dave Herman's efforts or AnneVK's
contributions had Anne not withdrawn at the end of his term. The idea that
either Dave or Anne is "captured" is risable. That Anne is still active in
helping to organise Extensible Web Summit events is more than we could hope
for.

> On whom does the
> burden of proof lie? IMO, it's on those who would tear down a barrier
> to corporate capture of the Internet.
>
> But what evidence do YOU offer that the Web's better off being designed
> by browser vendors who reject just about everything Jon Postel ever
> taught us about proper network design, despite all experience showing he
> was right?

I can't help but notice that you locate in me many faults other than my
own, which is perplexing, because I'd have thought anyone familiar with my
work wouldn't want for ammunition.

Regards
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2014 07:55:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:57:03 UTC