--On Monday, October 21, 2013 10:51 +0000 Yoav Nir
<ynir(_at_)checkpoint(_dot_)com> wrote:
The question, though, is how much would that reduce the load
on the IESG. If all we've done is get it down from 35
hours/week to 28 hours/week, I'm not sure it's worth it,
because you still can't hold another full-time job.
Yoav,
As others have pointed out, we don't have any large-scale
statistics about why people say "no". But, speaking quite
anecdotally from situations I've been involved in, there is a
huge difference between allowing someone to cut productive
day-job work hours down to four or even 2 1/2 or three days a
week and having to give them up entirely for two years.
In many situations, the choice isn't between "full time
availability for non-IETF work" and "IETF is the full time job".
It is whether someone has enough cycles left over after IETF
commitments to be substantially useful in the "day job"
environment.
In addition and for better or worse, I don't think the IESG (or
IAB) are ever likely to become the sort of role that is suited
to someone who puts in 40 hours a week (or 35 in some countries)
and then goes home and forgets about the job or role. In
practice, 28 hours / week might be considerably less than
half-time.
best,
john