On 05-Nov-19 08:54, Salz, Rich wrote:
> I wonder what people think would break if we moved to 5 AD's per area, and they could divide the WG's and IESG concalls amongst themselves?
Wouldn't work. An IESG of that size would be impossible to run like the current IESG, which is already too big to be cohesive. It would become more like a parliament and even less like a steering group.
If we want the IESG job to be more reasonably sized, we have to take work away from the ADs. As far as I can see, that means taking away their duty of acting as final reviewers. I don't want to name names because I don't think the ADs are to be blamed individually, but some of them spend *enormous* effort on detailed reviews. Either we have to trust the WGs more, or we have to trust the various review teams more, and allow the IESG to steer, which its name implies is its main job. And sign off on drafts that are good enough, rather than seeking perfection.
This is hardly a new discussion, but we just let it drift each year, after the NomCom season is over.
Brian
