thank you for the thoughtful post
everyone can agree that we need better processes to minimize the chances of an EOF-like incident from happening in the future. many of the new processes you propose seem worth trying
but in experimenting with new processes, let’s also remain cautious of falling into the opposite failure mode of overcorrection. each additional policy comes with cost and risks. things like
- imposing too much bureaucracy can cripple efficiency+execution in non-obvious ways
- imposing policies that are too rigid will eventually put the letter of the law in conflict with spirit of the law, similar to what you mention in your post
- it’s important to maintain the ability to update or discard suboptimal processes. it’s hard to design processes upfront in one shot. probably lots of iteration will be required to get them right
I think everyone should be excited to experiment with Tim’s proposed processes and to help figure out ways that they could be improved. just want to make sure everyone stays mindful of the tradeoffs that we’ll need to optimize around