[Osmf-talk] Board decision on initial composition of the Software Dispute Resolution Panel

Christoph Hormann chris_hormann at gmx.de
Sun Jan 31 15:02:38 UTC 2021


On Sunday 31 January 2021, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> In situations where I have been part of a group selecting candidates
> for a job, being able to talk *about* them in addition to talking
> *with* them has generally allowed the group making the decision to
> weigh a wider range of factors and therefore, I believe, led to a
> better decision.
>
> Of course someone outside the group would only see it the same way if
> they trusted that the group were optimising for the right outcome,
> and were competent enough. If you do not share the goals of the group
> making the decision, or if you share the goals but think they're
> incompetent at their job, then anything they do outside of the
> spotlight needs to be viewed with suspicion.

Well - as you already say this describes a practice for selecting
candicates for a job (i.e. personnel) where there is advance agreement
(usually in the form of a job description) what the desired
qualifications for the job are.

Practice for selecting political appointees is often significantly
different - both in Germany but especially also in the Anglo-American
culture sphere.  Public hearings investigating the qualifications of
candidates are common practice there.  It is in my experience fairly
rare that nomination, scrutiny and final selection of candidates in
case of political appointees all happen behind closed doors.

I am still not quite sure how the board views the role of the panel
members in the OSMF.  From the lack of a clear job description
specifying required qualifications and the nomination system based on a
kind of inner-OSMF proportional representation i would classify these
as political appointees.  Rory emphasizes that they are not considered
personnel while Allan re-affirms the classification as a 'personnel
matter' and the selection as a management task.

Regarding the matter of trust and suspicion - while trust of the
community is of course absolutely essential for the panel to be able to
perform productive work my focus here (as said many times in the past)
would be more on the subject of oversight.  Emphasizing the need for
oversight over decisions made by people in positions of power does not
necessarily imply suspicion or lack of trust.

--
Christoph Hormann
https://www.imagico.de/



More information about the osmf-talk mailing list