Looking at "bofreq.*-00", I see that 15/67 (22%) have "BOF chairs" set to something other than "TBD".

Would it be better to change the template header to "Proposed BOF chairs", and let the AD change it to "BOF chairs"?

What follows is, of course, my opinion. @zaheduzzaman was the responsible AD we confused - I'm tagging him, in case he has an opinion.

Looking at "bofreq.*-00", I see that 15/67 (22%) have "BOF chairs" set to something other than "TBD".

Would it be better to change the template header to "Proposed BOF chairs", and let the AD change it to "BOF chairs"?

One might think so, and that would solve one problem

• people think they are BOF chairs before the responsible AD has seen the bofreq,

but there's still another problem:

• the contents of the bofreq are publicly visible, so EVERYONE knows who was proposed, and if the AD picks someone else - as happened for the bofreq I was talking about, that's just awkward for potential chairs who weren't selected.

The proposed solution clearly puts the AD in charge of personnel decisions.

I should also thank you for fact-based analysis!

Looking at "bofreq.*-00", I see that 15/67 (22%) have "BOF chairs" set to something other than "TBD".

I talked to a lot of people about BOF proposals as both an IAB member and an AD, and there are a fair number of people who show up at the IETF with a thought, a draft, a mailing list, and a proposed charter, but don't have anyone in mind as chairs. I'd bet that's responsible for a solid chunk of the TBDs - if the proponents had looked at the current template for five more minutes, they could easily have entered names. 😄

IMHO, I think we should remove it from the template. ADs know to put something in before the point of knowing chairs matters or not.

That would work for me.