Delegation of power (was RE: Section 2.4 of draft-ietf-problem-statement-00.txt)

[Keith Moore]

> To my understanding, the IETF community should have the
> power, and it should choose how it delegates to power to anybody else.

The community does have the power, but most of the power is not
delegated.  Instead it is exercised directly.  Individuals have
power and influence by contributing time and effort to working groups or
other document writing efforts.  

The nomcom is the means by which power is delegated to IAB and IESG. 

The power isn't delegated down by IESG and IAB any more than it is
delegated up from working groups.  Rather it is sort of a tug-of-war.

IESG recognizes that it cannot produce anything useful by itself, that
it is dependent on working groups and document authors to do the bulk of
the work that goes into producing documents.   IESG also realizes
that it cannot function effectively if IESG pushes back on working
groups too much.  This is another reason that IESG members
sometimes "hold their noses" and let poor quality work through.

It's not clear, however, whether working group participants see the
value in IESG - in trying to make sure quality is maintained, in trying
to provide comprehensive review, in trying to ensure that processes are
followed for the sake of fairness and accountability, and especially in
trying to minimize conflicts between competing concerns.  Many
participants seem to see IESG only as a barrier to completion of
their work, one which does not provide any value.  I don't think that's
an accurate perception, but sadly, I suspect it's a widespread one.

Ketih