Friends
I have realised, rather belatedly, that we don't actually have any written
guidance for shepherds of GHC proposals, so we all have to make it up as we
go along. Perhaps it'd be helpful to have some. Here's a start.
The shepherd does these things:
- Makes a recommendation to the committee for whether to accept, reject,
or send back for revision, within a week of being appointed.
- Actively guide the committee's discussion.
- Maintain a list of votes on this spreadsheet
<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e6GdwHmAjeDEUhTvP-b18MDkpTfH3SMHhFu…>
.
- Actively facilitate the committee discussion, guiding us towards a
decision, within the published time frame of 4-5 weeks.
- Summarise the committee's thinking for the author's benefit, and work
with the author on next steps -- this may often take the form of revisions
to the proposal.
-
- Remind members (by name, not just general exhortation) who are silent
that they are highly encouraged to contribute.
- If the discussion does not converge within 4-5 weeks, take action to
consult the chair, vice-chair, or secretary to decide what to do.
It's much more than "make a recommendation and wait".
Being a member of the GHC Steering Committee is a real service to the
community. But of course we all have day jobs, and so not everything
happens as we hope.
Any thoughts?
Simon
