On Sat, Sep 09, 2023 at 04:17:02PM -0400, Keith Moore wrote:
> On 9/9/23 13:46, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> > I think experiments such as fully proxying AD review to senior directorate
> > members would help to improve process.
>
> If the AD isn't already an expert in the technologies, they have a difficult
> time evaluating who is qualified to be a "senior directorate member".
Goes with almost any "hiring" decisions. NomCom for example not being differnt
in that respect. IMHO.
> Also, the AD is the one who has to be responsible for the decision to
> approve or DISCUSS a document. "proxying" such review to someone who hasn't
> accepted any responsibility, and who isn't subject to any pushback for poor
> decisions (or worse), seems like a fundamental violation of process.
But like with any other role in the IETF there is the acceptance of responsibilities.
> In general it's difficult enough to get enough qualified volunteers to be WG
> participants, much more difficult to get qualified volunteers who are
> qualified to review their work. (And "qualified" means not only having the
> requisite technical expertise, but also being held in respect by the wider
> community, and not favor one party's interests over another.)
I am trying to remember the last RTG AD where "the wider community" would not
err on the simple company association to assume favoring one's party interest over another.
I guess when someone gets re-confirmed, those concerns are gone (or the "wider community"
rather accepts some "balance of powers").
Cheers
Toerless
