Subject: RE: Wording of Engineering Processes Problem

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2003 06:44:22 +0300

Hi Eric,

> > > Solutions to this problem might include:  adoption of
> > > quality processes, training, better review during document
> > > production, flogging WG chairs who produce crap, etc.
> > 
> > Or how about simple checks & balances?
> 
> I don't think so. The main function of checks and balances in
> most political systems is to stop things from getting done.

Checks and balances are used to avoid a situation where one
group asserts too strong of an influence over a situation.
Well, one could call the IESG a check and NONCOM a balance,
though there would be those who beg to differ, but that is not
my point.
 
> If we actually want to produce work that's good, I think we'll
> have to orient ourselves more towards that goal.

I agree.  Looking at Margaret's list above, if taken to an
extreme, the solution could be so heavy-weight that it becomes
more important than the actual work itself.

John

---

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: 10 Jun 2003 21:55:47 -0700

> though there would be those who beg to differ, but that is not
Agreed. All I meant was that usually when you have a check/balance
situation, the check consists of the ability to block work.

-Ekr

-- 
[Eric Rescorla                                   [email-masked]]
                http://www.rtfm.com/