Re: Quality Control and that nasty A word (was: Re: [mpowr] Re: [Solutions] Further work on WG (chair) roles - MPOWR WG proposal)

[Dave Crocker <[e-mail]>]

Pete,

>>One argument some have made against giving the WG chairs more X 
>>stuff is that we don't get very good people as WG chairs.

PR> Straw man. I've certainly never said that.


It is pretty close to something that I said.  Of course, I tried to be a
bit more diplomatic, casting the problem in terms of working group
chairs having less experience.

The simple point is that we already have a power with ADs sometimes
exercising their power inappropriately, so we should assume that moving
things down to the chair will suffer at least as much of a problem.
Given that chairs are usually less experienced and are chosen in a
different fashion, the problem could become much worse.

However I think that your own point about the inherent power of the
working group, compared with the derived power of IETF management,
including chairs, is the most important point.

This is where reference to the IETF's being a volunteer organization is
so important. The troops really are in charge.  When we run things
without paying attention to that, we get volunteers who leave, by giving
up on the working group.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:[phone]>


_______________________________________________
mpowr mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr