I disagree with the CSAC comments that the hiring of Viera for the Henderson-Melendez fight was proper. I agree that growing popularity of MMA makes it difficult to select quality judges who were former fighters to not have some sort of peripheral association with a fighter, but in this case, the CSAC got it wrong.
The CSAC must use the metric of the APPEARANCE of impropriety as their litmus test for selection of judges or referees. I wonder what other metrics are looked at when selecting judges/referees? A few things that comes to mind, that I would believe are reasonable screening/checks are:
* not an instructor or current fighter that is affiliated with a certain gym/MMA school
* relative or friend of the fighter or fighter's coach, or coaching staff
* not a member of a betting/gambling site that can place bets on MMA
* does not have a history of serious financial issues such as bankruptcy, default, etc.
Aside from the affiliation issues, the rest of it sounds like a basic screening check you would do if you were going to work for a company where you would handle confidential information. Financial issues are a big indicator of whether there will be issues or not. Same should go for judges/refs. Corrupt/Bad ones are always in it for the money!