Perhaps RFCs could list (within the document) who reviewed/approved them, and in which role/capacity the review had been performed. This could serve two purposes: - some minimal reward for those individuals taking the time to review the document, - encouragement for the reviewers to ensure that an adequate review has been performed based on the role/capacity in which they are acting. Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Ralph Droms > Sent: 06 November 2019 11:03 > To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; ietf <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: Quality of Directorate reviews > > > > > On Nov 6, 2019, at 5:34 AM, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > On 05/11/2019 21:50, Michael Richardson wrote: > >> > >> Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> 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. > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> I think that there is a lack of trust by ADs of the various > directorates. > > > > Other ADs have commented on this, but I think I need to repeat what > > they said and expand on it. > > > > Results are vary varied. Some are quite good (e.g. Gen-Art) and others > > really depend on reviewer. ADs responsible for Directorates are faces > > with the choice of firing half of their Directorates (which has some > > rather unfortunate consequences) and/or raise the bar on who should be > > allowed to join. We already struggle to recruit people at all levels > > of our organization. > > > > Best Regards, > > Alexey > > We shouldn't be depending on last-minute quality checks to maintain the > quality of our output. Working groups should be producing documents that > are ready to publish, and develop trust that their documents are high > quality. > > - Ralph > > >
