That is a very accurate comment.
But the more central idea is to accommodate the life events of your colleagues. I don't see anything wrong with just having three of them. It seems like it shouldn't be a big deal.
thanks,
Rob
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022 at 5:31 PM Mark Nottingham <mnot=40mnot.net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If that's the attitude we take, how did we get to three Routing ADs?
/me ducks
> On 25 Oct 2022, at 11:28 am, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Hiya,
>
> On 25/10/2022 00:54, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> FWIW - +1 to reducing load on the ART ADs. Three seems appropriate,
>> if we can find reasonable candidates.
> I'd start from a not-strongly-held sort-of opposite opinion
> that the rest of the IESG ought be helping out if/as needed
> due to an overload of one area.(*) But, mostly, I'd want to
> know what the current IESG think of such an idea before any
> attempt to change the numbers or roles of ADs was attempted.
>
> Cheers,
> S.
>
> (*) By "overload" I mean having too many WGs or too many that
> impose extra work on an AD. If we wanted to consider parental
> leave and vicissitudes of life issues and their affect on the
> IESG and AD load, that ought be a separate discussion. That'd
> also be a good and worthwhile discussion, because things just
> do happen that the IESG wasn't so well setup to handle whilst
> I served. That's a different discussion but also one I reckon
> ought be lead by the current IESG.
> <OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc>
--
Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
_______________________________________________
art mailing list
art@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/art
