moore@xxxxxxxxxx (Keith Moore) wrote on 27.04.05 in <20050427165016.02f6b491.moore@xxxxxxxxxx>: > I am not saying that ADs will never misuse their power. That's what > the appeals process is for. I'm saying that under the current situation > the vast majority of AD "edicts" (as opposed to directed feedback) > are the result of WGs reaching the point of exhaustion without > producing good designs. Fix that problem and it becomes reasonable to > expect fewer and less onerous AD "edicts" and to push back on those > edicts more often. WG exhaustion isn't always a WG problem, either. ISTR a case of a WG that got replaced its chair by the IESG, and told to do its work differently, two or three times - and *every* time, the new chair stopped posting to the list after a short time. (The last time, I think he came back after a significant timeout.) That's a recipe for exhaustion if ever I saw one. I might even call it active sabotage. MfG Kai _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf