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

Re: A proposal for revising the rules on TAG Participation

From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2014 00:50:22 -0400
Message-ID: <53C0BE8E.6000301@dbooth.org>
To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>, "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>, Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>, Charles McCathie Nevile <chaals@yandex-team.ru>
CC: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
On 07/11/2014 07:37 PM, Marcos Caceres wrote:
>
>
> On July 10, 2014 at 8:32:38 PM, Charles McCathie Nevile
> (chaals@yandex-team.ru) wrote:
>>> I would be interested to hear of things that Marcos would have
>> done but didn't because he was required to resign, and whether
>> anything would have mitigated the situation except changing the
>> rules.
>
> Well, let see. I set up the TAG GitHub account and was happily doing
> API reviews. I was also starting to rewrite the architecture of the
> Web document with Henry, but had to stop. I couldn't justify the time
> and travel commitment to my employer (Mozilla) if I wasn't officially
> on the TAG.  [ . . . . ]

That's an interesting data point.  Thanks for sharing it Marcos.  But 
apart from demonstrating the obvious loss of a good person making good 
contributions, at the same time it demonstrates the fact that your 
employer's agenda trumped your personal desire to do good and contribute 
to the Web.

No matter how well-meaning one is, it simply is not possible to maintain 
neutrality (or the appearance thereof) when one's food and mortgage are 
paid by one's employer.

Companies routinely manipulate the good intentions of their employees to 
benefit the company's agenda.  (And I do not mean to be singling out any 
particular company or individual here.)

Stacking a decision-making body with very likable, talented and 
well-meaning individuals is the most effective way to do it.  The fact 
that those individuals may honestly attempt to be neutral does *not* 
mean that the net effect is neutral.  And again, I'm not saying that any 
particular company is consciously trying to stack the TAG.  But 
conscious or not, that can be the effect.

Personally, I think it would be okay to relax the TAG's rule slightly to 
allow two individuals from the same organization to serve temporarily 
and/or with the approval of the AB.   But beyond that I think there 
would be too much danger of undue dominance by one organization, 
regardless of how well meaning the individuals are.

David Booth
Received on Saturday, 12 July 2014 04:50:50 UTC

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