Re: [mpowr] SUMMARY: Further Work on WG (chair) Roles -- MPOWR WG Proposal

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

> This discussion can be loosely categorized into three separate
> sub-discussions:
>
>     (1) Should we form a WG to move some responsibility
>         and authority from the IESG to WGs or WG chairs?
>     (2) Does it make sense to give WG chairs more document
>         shepherding responsibility, and if so what is the
>         best way to do that?
>     (3) Should WG chairs have the authority to block
>         documents due to low technical quality,
>         insufficient review, etc.?

It would be nice if you could replace "WG chairs" with "WG" in all of
the above items when categorizing. There was no consensus whether WG
Chair should be the object of these changes or the WG as a whole.
Let's stick with a more general case (WG as a whole) for now and
decide on Chair/author/participant role at the next level of detail.
This approach will prevent people like me from objecting to your
categorization itself as a starting point.

Thanks,

Alex.

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