There really isn't a point to asking about GM reform to a Deputy GM nominee. They don't really hold any power to running the GM position, nor do they have a say in it's structure anyway.
It has been a general practice though to derive input on structure from the people who have to "make the crap function" and thus it behooves us to listen to them about suggestions to make the crap less crappy.
My problem with GM reform is that many people bring it up now and again yet nobody ever proposes a specific reform. The idea of reform is attractive however nobody has yet to actually propose a reform and argue why it specifically would make the Game Engine better.
I can answer that question.
To put it simply no reform is going to fabricate an active, interested and competent person who can do the job of GM. That is why everyone loves to talk about reform of the GM, but 1) nothing ever happens or 2) the reforms don't cause substantial change.
The reason why the GM reforms when passed don't ensure results, is because again it comes back to having someone able and willing to perform the task. Perhaps reform can induce interests on the margins in some fashion, but it is basically the in game version of pushing on a string.
