--On Thursday, October 21, 2021 23:07 +0200 Carsten Bormann
<cabo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2021-10-21, at 22:43, Barry Leiba
> <barryleiba=40computer.org@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> At the very least, we should be able to slow down the "ADs
>> move to the IAB" routine, as it's pretty hard to justify that
>> deviation.
>
> Hmm, I'm not even sure I find that particular maneuver to be
> such a big problem. Clearly, the implicit incumbent bonus
> needs to be controlled here (and there should not be a
> standard revolving door), but I've seen some ex-ADs make
> great IAB members. I think.
Carsten,
You have seen it. I have seen it. However, I have also seen
ex-ADs who have made the move without a gap immediately retire
in place, take a while to understand how the IAB is different
from the IESG, or focus on a single topic and become largely
useless for ongoing IAB work. Whether one like the rigid rule
or not (I don't), I think the question about IESG-> IAB
transitions is whether the people who have made them -- even
those who have worked out well-- would have benefited from a
short break and forced (?) opportunity to participate as a
non-leadership community member. FWIW, as one of those who was
moved directly from the IESG to the IAB, I almost certainly
would have.
And, in any event, I see both Rich's and Barry's proposals (and
the effect of the one I posted today) as more "take a break"
than "you are retired" and I think that distinction is important.
john
