OPEN ISSUE: WG Chair Selection

Spencer Dawkins spencer at mcsr-labs.org
Tue May 20 08:19:34 CEST 2003


Dear Joel,

I understand your distinction between WG chairs leaving and
"leaving with assistance".

I've got to ask - how common IS the case where a WG chair is

(1) not performing to the point where s/he should be replaced, and
(2) not willing to step down?

If this happens once a year, I'd say "tough, let the AD announce
the impending replacement publically and ask for input anyway".
It's not like anything is getting done in the WG anyway, right?

If this happens once per IETF per area (for instance), that might be
different. But I'd like to see more openness, and don't want to shut
down an opportunity for more openness to accommodate an rare
case, if it's really rare.

Spencer

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <joel at stevecrocker.com>
To: <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2003 9:44 AM
Subject: Re: OPEN ISSUE: WG Chair Selection


> There are actually two very different cases.
> For simplicity, let me discuss them both in terms of an existing working
> group (both cases exist for new working groups, but there are other issues
> that cloud things.)
>
> One case is where you have a chair who for one or another reason has
chosen
> to step down.  You are going to have to find a new chair.  Announcing the
> opening would not in and of itself cause a problem.
>
> The other case is where the AD wants / needs to replace the chair when the
> chair would not on his own step down.  (Presume the AD has already
> discussed the causes with the current chair, but probably not the intended
> action.)  The AD probably does not want to force the issue until there is
a
> good replacement chair available.  As such, making a public announcement
> would be "interesting".
>
> And of course, having two different procedures would mean that one was
> publicising which case actually applied...
>
> We can make personnel management harder if we want, but is that really a
> good idea?
>
> Note that having said all that, it would be really good to have better
> mechanisms for finding chairs, and for finding new blood to serve as
> chairs.  Appointing chairs was the part of the AD job I hated when I was
> doing that.  I just think it is more complex than the exchange below
suggests.
>
> Yours,
> Joel



More information about the Problem-statement mailing list