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.
I don't know about ISTR, but similar things have happened to the WEBDAV working group in the last two years (no, I'm not saying it's intentional; but fact is we got two new chairs who did not / do not seem to be very interested in the current WG work).
Best regard, Julian
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf