Re: I-D Action: draft-rsalz-termlimits-00.txt

[tom petch <[e-mail]>]

On 21/10/2021 18:43, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> If we think we need more churn in ADs, the solution is some combination
>> of finding/grooming more good candidates and making it easier for people
>> to serve, so that the nomcom has better candidates to choose from.
>
> I think this is a really key point: I would rather see us put the
> effort into figuring out how to scale the AD job so that more good
> people are willing and able to do it.  I think that's critical to the
> IETF's long-term viability.

My hobby horse is to reduce the work that ADs have to do and my sense is 
that this is going up because I-Ds are arriving in a less than adequate 
state.  I find it hard to judge because it used to be that the e-mails 
for IESG review did not appear on the WG list but one metric would be 
how many e-mail are generated at that time.  A recent I-D generated 51 
e-mail on the WG list as part of IESG review, after a significant number 
of e-mail on Last Call.  For me this says we are asking the IESG to do 
too much and so making it harder to find AD.

The first step to solvng a problem is defining the problem:-)

Tom Petch

> Barry
>
> .
>