Re: Proper credit for work done -- on finding chairs (was CHANGE THE JOB

On Oct 18, 2013, at 9:38 AM, Ted Lemon <ted(_dot_)lemon(_at_)nominum(_dot_)com> 
wrote:

> On Oct 18, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Mary Barnes 
> <mary(_dot_)h(_dot_)barnes(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
> > [MB] Can you clue us in as to what "substantial action" has been taken?   
> > [/MB] 
> I thought we sent something around about that.   ADs and WG chairs are 
> encouraged to ask for directorate reviews for certain directorates (possibly 
> all directorates, I can't remember) prior to working group last call.   This 
> is in the form of an experiment, not a new policy; we'll see how it goes.
>
> We've done a number of other things in the same vein—e.g., document shepherds 
> are now being invited onto telechats, so that they can do the work of 
> tracking action items for the authors rather than the AD doing it.
>
> I think there were other items on the list, but I don't remember them off the 
> top of my head.   The point is, if anybody thinks the IESG is a deer in the 
> headlights on this issue, that's not the case—we are actively trying to do 
> things to ameliorate the situation.
The revision of the qualifications provided to the nomcom was signficant.

experiments with narrative shepherds reports.

experiments with post-ietf working-group summaries performed by chairs.

>

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail