--On Friday, October 18, 2013 13:57 -0700 Andy Bierman
<andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>...
> IMO it is an implementation detail how the IETG divides its
> work. I agree with Brian that just delegating the undesrable
> work to an assistant volunteer is not a real plan. But if
> NOMCOM thinks there is a critical shortage of IESG candidates,
> then the IESG better fix it, or perhaps the NOMCOM should
> mandate a solution.
In practical terms, I don't understand this paragraph. You have
suggested increasing the number of ADs. But, if there were a
critical shortage of IESG candidates (and it is clear that has
been the case in some areas in the recent past), then increasing
the number of slots to be filled can't solve that problem
(indeed can only make it worse), even if it held out the
possibility of a lower workload in the long run. I'd also like
to understand what solutions you propose the Nomcom might
"mandate" and how. As far as I can tell, they can do only three
things. Of those, the second is unclear because it has been
much-discussed, never actually attempted, and whether or not it
is possible depends on interpretations of an edge case in the
relevant procedures.
(1) Fill a position. In theory and in the absence of
other candidates, they could fill a position with a dead
body or someone's pet rock, but I assume the IAB would
find those candidates unqualified.
(2) Decide to not fill a position. Whatever that would
accomplish, it would _increase_ the workload on the
surviving AD in the area (if any) and/or paralyze the
area. I assume the Transport area got an adequate
preview of that effect earlier this year.
(3) Make recommendations that might or might not be
acted on and that certainly cannot affect the current
year's slots or candidates.
So what would you propose they "mandate" and how?
john