[mpowr] process-only participation in WG [Troops vs superpower]

On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Alex Conta wrote:
> You say you've been told "IETF does not have enough folks willing to do 
> process management only, without the technical work".
> 
> I believe that.
> 
> But a separation of process management from technical work, in case of N 
> WGs in IETF, will allow X to chair WG A, and do technical work in as 
> many WGs as X wants except A, which is N-1 WGs.
> 
> So I do not see why you stopped?  Individual X can do both process 
> management and technical work.

My assumption is that a person participates in a WG because he wants 
to contribute to it (usually technically).

You assume that capable individuals are willing to do process
management in those WGs which they're not interested of (because, if
they were, they would be participating to the WG making them uncapable
to act as WG chair).

That is a huge assumption in the real world.  Chairing is a lot of 
work.  Why would I (or someone else) want to waste time on something 
that I don't even find interesting, while I could use the same time to 
contribute technically in other WGs?

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________
mpowr mailing list
mpowr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr