On 11/11/2015 08:39 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Hi Dave,
On 12/11/2015 03:45, Dave Crocker wrote:
Brian,
Were this a reading comprehension test, you'd get a failing grade.
You've misinterpreted or invented, rather than dealing with the plain
text as I wrote it. It says what I meant.
We disagree profoundly about what your words mean. I don't think it would be
productive to continue mutual textual analysis.
I do want to say this: We have given the ADs power of decision over what
gets published. They take this power very seriously; that's intrinsic in
the way they are selected and appointed. It's the first thing you learn
as a new AD: the buck stops here. If we want to stop the ADs spending large
amounts of time on document quality, we have to take away their power of
decision over what gets published.
<voice=spock>This is not logical.</voice>
If an AD thinks it's his job to get a certain outcome (high quality
documents, for instance), and he can't use an effective means to achieve
the goal (blocking obviously bad documents), he'll either give up in
disgust (bad for him and the community) or try to reach the goal by
other means - which will likely take up more of his time.
In my opinion, the main job of the AD is to get others to do *their* job
- especially to make WG chairs do their job of making the WG produce
high quality drafts that reflect WG consensus and help make the Internet
better. (Yes, that's three wishes.)