ADs who are also WG chairs
Brian E Carpenter
brian at hursley.ibm.com
Fri Jun 27 21:28:34 CEST 2003
I agree that it's amazing that ADs ever say "yes" to this (except
when the WG is tailing off, for example) and I think the case of
being a chair in the same area is definitely a conflict of interest.
I think recusal should cover the other cases. It is worth documenting.
James Kempf wrote:
> > One of the issues that came up in the discussion on rough consensus
> > is the issue of ADs being WG chairs - either in their own area or in
> > another
> > area.
> > I do not believe this dual role aspect of IETF management is yet
> > reflected
> > in the problem draft.
> > Should it be?
> As long as the AD acting as a WG chair recluses themselves from any and all
> IESG decisions having to do with the WG, to avoid conflict of interest, I
> don't think there should be a problem. I think its somewhat more
> questionable if the WG is in the same area, since it removes one person from
> oversight, and having two technically knowledgable, independent opinions on
> a WG is often useful.
> That said, I cannot see how, given the workload, an AD can possibly do a
> good job as a WG chair and still expect to fufill their duties as an AD.
> Just on the basis of that alone, it might be sensible to consider some kind
> of strong disapproval, if not restriction, and make it an exceptional case.
> My 0.02 euro.
More information about the Problem-statement