On Nov 24, 2020, at 10:25 AM, Renard, Kenneth D CTR USARMY CCDC C5ISR (USA) <kenneth.d.renard.ctr@mail.mil> wrote:
Rogue Operator Work Party Meeting Notes – 24 November 2020
The primary discussion of today’s meeting was around the RSSAC037 guiding principles and document organization describing what it means for an RSO to be rogue. Instead of describing specific principles and examples of violating each, it was proposed to describe major activities and examples of rogue behavior in 2 different sections:
• Objective/Technical/Measureable? This section will pretty much be a summary of actions/examples described in the current document for Guiding principles #2 and #6. Things like changing or removing zone contents, or using alternate protocols. Note that some types of technical behaviors are not easily measured.
• Subjective/Non-Technical/Unmeasureable This section will be smaller section which references actions that _could_ lead to a rogue operator situation, but are not strict (binary) indicators. The document shall not explicitly define actions that are rogue, but instead describe work party discussions on activities that are undesirable or could be further investigated by the SAPF to determine if they constitute a rogue operator.
These would replace the current section titled “Definition of a Rogue Operator”.
Before I start writing, I would like to be sure the two sections are parallel. I think that "objective/subjective" is the best of the three proposed splits. Does anyone object to us using those as our differentiator? --Paul Hoffman