Originally Posted by
Knestis
The worst possible scenario - if the goal is a repeatable, transparent policy process - is in place when the decision-makers can invoke the same "rule" as permission to do something, or a prohibition against it, both with equal vigor. Change the operational definition of a word or two, and you can re-purpose any given policy to do whatever you want - if you're in charge. If you're NOT - or are not favored by those who are - you potentially get screwed by inequitable application of the rule.
Right now - IN PRACTICE - what we have is, "The CRB can do any damned thing it wants with Model X," and defend it with some twist of the written word. That's precisely what the Process (RIP) was intended to prevent. And before someone chimes in that the process (lowercase 'p') is still being used, I mean the Process as defined for systemic, repeatable, transparent review of race weights.
K