--On Sunday, 20 October, 2013 07:52 -0400 Scott Brim
<scott.brim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But it
> doesn't solve the problem. If we learn to adjust to having
> fewer ADs, and the trend toward a smaller more homogeneous
> candidate pool continues, we end up with just a Chair and
> maybe 1-2 ADs, plus a lot of (appointed) "assistants". That
> could work, but let's decide explicitly if that's the
> trajectory we want to be on.
Most others haven't, but you, Scott, have been around long
enough to remember that is more or less where the IETF started,
in that case with an appointed Chair, Chair-appointed ADs, and
whatever help or organizational structure the latter could
muster. That structure has the advantage of efficiency, real
accountability, and a guarantee of a group that can work
together well. Unless the Chair is really careful (and, IMO,
Phill did a superb job) it completely loses all of the
advantages of a diversity of views and a number of other things,
including distributed accountability.
It seems to be that, whether going that route, splitting off the
management and approval processes, forcing the number of WGs
down, doubling the size of the IESG, or even reviving the
long-dead idea of breaking the IETF up into separate Area (or
cluster of Areas) organizations, we have no shortage of
proposals. We've even had proposals for tuning the Nomcom model
that might help with some of the candidacy-availability problem
as well as other things. Each one has disadvantages. Most have
some advantages and/or side-effect solutions to other problems.
What I haven't seen since the changes of the first half of the
1990s is real community consensus that it is time to do
something rather than agonize about particular symptoms (e.g.,
Nomcom problems getting ample good candidates for all areas),
complain or whine, and ultimately do nothing.
Many times "do nothing" has been the result of an incumbent IESG
being happy with the status quo and effectively blocking
consideration of change proposals, but often the community just
hasn't considered the issue important enough to expend the
energy. Perhaps this time will be different.
best,
john