Trusting the IESG to manage the reform process (was:Re:Doingthe
Right Things?)
Bound, Jim
Jim.Bound at hp.com
Mon Jun 9 15:36:40 CEST 2003
ok lets not use "blocking" lets use excessive review by a bar that is to
high for the level that the document is trying to achieve.
/jim
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Bush [mailto:randy at psg.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 8:12 PM
> To: Eric Rescorla
> Cc: Bound, Jim; Margaret Wasserman;
> problem-statement at alvestrand.no; Brian E Carpenter
> Subject: Re: Trusting the IESG to manage the reform process
> (was:Re:Doingthe Right Things?)
>
>
> >> rofl! all the authority and fifteen cents will get you on
> the subway
> >> [0].
> > I'm not sure what you're saying here. The ADs have immense
> > authority--the authority to block documents.
>
> nice hyperbole, but the fact is no one blocks documents, we
> point out what we think are problems and ask to discuss them
> to either find out we have misunderstood or, should the
> problem be real, actually get the problem addressed. this is
> the same 'authority' the author, editor, wg chair, or
> reviewer has. big whoopie doo.
>
> the question is what can be done to improve the quality of documents.
>
> > Since companies and WGs spend lots of time and money trying to get
> > documents passed, the ability to block
>
> artificial polarization. as i said above, documents can be
> called for discussion by 92.3% of the population. the
> problem is that some authors, editors, wg chairs, ... seem to
> prefer the lazy but beauty contest winning path of saying yes
> to anything and then hoping the iesg will take the heat for
> asking the hard questions.
>
> randy
>
>
More information about the Problem-statement
mailing list