contrivance vs connivance at NAR RESO standards group; comparisons with NSA contrivances

Folks with authority “contrived” to deny a member of RESO the opportunity, like others with clearly less capability upon obvious evaluation, to present accomplishments implementing a technical specification. This was classical ‘organized’ real estate politics, shameful in the social sense but hardly illegal; and not even malicious. It denied others the opportunity to see the full range of opinion. It was founded on “normal” bitchiness, that lies at the heart of how the vendor-side of realty works. On a scale of 1…10, it’s a 1; and on a scale of how the politics WILL evolve as real money becomes involved, it’s a 0.0001. On the scale of issues facing the world, it doesn’t even register. Its more a commentary on how hard it is to deal with biases in “boards” that are conformed of cliques of vendors who work together – keiretsu 系列?, style.

But it does show that the new director of and official leader of management team associated with the NAR-backed RESO group has his work cut out for him, as he properly panders to his customers (his paying members). Less important to him, probably, is the public interest – those who perhaps unfortunately for all such standards groups formed of paying members do have a voice under anti-trust rules. I suspect, as a NAR-related entity, folks are going to get a rude awakening to the real power of the public, under anti-trust “investigations” or even the mere threat of a subpoena.

The basic position is this: you have to show that no politics can be influencing executive decisions (like blocking a demo). You cannot “choose to evaluate” one request (to demo and lead opinion as did others) in a manner different to other requests (which is what happened). You cannot hide behind formalism of committees and boards and votes, trying to hide the contrivance behind a veil of audited formalisms that “show correctness”. These methods ARE the red flag (since this is how the anti-trust investigation hones in on the means used to hide the execution of improper biases seen in practices that represent the ‘effective’ policy). Yes, being a politician in a world of anti-trust requires the best class of politician.

Politics is hard; and even a technical standards group is a political space. One wants politicians in charge – those who can find or “develop” consensus. And, yes, that mean the presence of necessarily two-faced individuals – who despite that class of social skill somehow don’t come across as corrupt or biased – when doing that difficult job. On this, RESO is doing ok and even gets an excellent score for the most part – but time will tell whether “management correctness” is used improperly (while biases really rule the roost, with “contrivances”). A strong indicator of current concern arises over the “money-making” opportunities to run certification programs, in an environment in which a behind the scenes  “enforcer” is subtly manipulating the need to not only making a complying product – adjudged by peer-reviewed science – but bother obtaining certification. As NAR and RESO move FROM a world of voluntary compliance in data export standard to “induced” compunction to certify with a particular program (because we will hint about withdrawal  of your access to the NAR E&O program – a threat to whose who defy the mandate – if you don’t), we have to look at RESO more carefully, under anti-trust – to see the linkages between those making money and those instrumenting politics based on a program of “(implicit) threats to enforce”. Since this is a national scale issue, we have national politics.

The right overall metaphor to understand where US realty is, on these topics, is NSA – and the use of spying policy and practice at, specifically, now web-scale. I personally do believe that NSA has in every way met the spirit and letter of the rules concerning spying – largely only on things that no parent (or well-meaning government official) would object to back when it was national scale and even now when its gone beyond the policy engineering to attempt web scale secret surveillance. But that doesn’t alter the fact that there is systemic NSA spying on you (and me) all the time, now, with vendors deceiving you about the value of their “privacy policy” full of correctness terms that are not worth having (or reading). This is the nature of a “contrivance” policy – which fails to scale beyond a certain size. The vendors that facilitate and benefit from such a policy are “conniving”, in contrast. RESO is now where NSA was, as it went from national scale to web scale – with hard decision to take on “how” to govern, at much larger scale.

Good start RESO, but a UK-style black mark is hereby registered (“on the permanent record held by the uppity school principal “just in case”) for having “contrived”. You failed the first test of knowing HOW to avoid sending up anti-trust red flags. You did really well on lots of other metrics though; and thus get a second chance to show that you know how not to let “the semblance” of  management professionalism be used to present merely a mask of anti-bias that actually facilitates and allows an overt bullying culture similar to US high-school adolescent cliques and immature bitchiness. If you see a determined need to use bully politics – which I’ve found cause to apply twice in my life –  be open about it (and take the hit when the keiretsu folks bully back).


About home_pw

Computer Programmer who often does network administration with focus on security servers. Sometimes plays at slot machine programming.
This entry was posted in rant. Bookmark the permalink.