[CCWG-ACCT] Update on Board discussions on the CCWG Update

[Bruce Tonkin]

Hello Paul,

We may be closer to agreement than may be apparent.

>>    But no group of individuals, however wise or thoughtful they may be, should have an independent power to define how this resource should be used. 

Yes - actually I think I am in strong agreement with you there.   I didn't express myself well.


>>  In the end, Milton is right (did I just say that???)  the "community" is a much better proxy for the "public as a whole" than is the Board ... and the Board has to understand that.

Agreed.   Actually I see the Board's role with respect to reviewing policy development work is primarily to confirm that the full community process has been followed and all affected members have been consulted.   I agree with you that it is not the board's role to insert its own view or solutions.    So far as I know the Board has never rejected a policy recommendation from an SO nor changed it.   

The grey area has been in accepting some advice from ACs and then trying to incorporate some of that advice in agreements.   The grey area sometimes is described as a debate between what is policy (clearly the responsibility of an SO) and what is implementation (normally the role of staff).   In any case the Board hasn't inserted its own view, but tried to follow the advice from at least part of the community.   This is an area where we can certainly further improve.

What I was trying to communicate was that a Board member should be working in the best interest of the "community" (as you define it) as a whole, rather than a board member acting just on behalf of one segment of the community that may have elected appointed that Board director.   

Regards,
Bruce Tonkin