On 04/15/2013 05:26 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > We can continue to appoint groups with additional rounds of review, but IMO, they are scoped (and the IESG review guidance appears to back up that point). I think Joe is correct there. Another data point is that we asked secdir (who currently have an 80% review rate for documents) if they could see a way to get more done earlier and thus reduce the review-all requirement for ADs. There were a significant number of secdir folks who thought that increasing the expectations on them might well mean getting far less than 80% of documents reviewed - basically, they're also very busy folks and our current 20% dropped-review rate might just shoot up if we ask for too much. I do wish there were a good way to reduce the AD review burden and am happy to chat on or offlist with anyone who has ideas, but I for one am not seeing anything obvious. S.