On May 14, 2009, at 9:49 AM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
I'm still wondering, however, whether we're tinkering with the wrong variable. If documents really need that much work when they come out of WGs, does that mean that they're really in bad shape?
That's worth looking at, but as I said yesterday, I think there is also room for concern on the IESG side.
On May 13, 2009, at 2:05 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
As an author, I sometimes get the feeling that ADs place discusses because they feel honor-bound to find something wrong with a document. I personally would appreciate getting those remarks during the working group process
To be honest, getting solid reviews in the WGs can be a pain, and I think that's what you're saying is needed.