Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
A person who accepts a position of public responsibility accepts public accountability. This does not restrict their freedom; it means they accept a higher level of responsibility for the effects of their public statements. Reducing those who depend on and are circumscribed by their guidance to unsophisticated minds as a means to broaden the domain of such statements and reduce the responsibility to critically evaluate them before making them is to violate the trust placed in the position and to therefore, dilute the credibility of the current holder, perhaps, of the institution itself. An academic mail address for non-academic office holders makes no difference. I sympathize with your problem in your university, but the office holders of the W3C are not academics. The W3C staff is accountable. It comes with the office. Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Rick Jelliffe [mailto:ricko@a...] From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@i...> > The problem is authority and credibility. If > the public statements of the authorities are > at odds with the policy as expressed in the > record of authority, credibility suffers. This is where I disagree; W3C is a consortium, but it is hosted at several famous universities, so academic (well, quasi-academic) freedom should be extended to its staff.
|
