I agree that there is a foreseeable problem with the workshops - both IACR and non-IACR. In a nutshell, we will "vamperize" them with the "Proceedings of the IACR" (proc.IACR)and suck out of them all the good publications.
I don't think that the workshops will disappear. We'll get either an informal solution or a formal solution (or a mix of both):
(1) Informal solution: Workshops will accept any talk where an author says "look, I have an IACR Publication. Would you like me to speak at your workshop?" Out of sheer lack of submissions, workshops will agree. Alternatively, the will actively "hunt" publications in proc.IACR that have not been accepted for AC/EC/Crypto-Presentation. Both information is public, so we cannot prevent this.
(2) Formal solution: Workshops get (somehow) incorporated into proc.IACR and agree among each other which presentation goes to which workshop. The system will be self-regulating: Authors that thing their article is too good for workshop X will decline an invitation and hope to get invited for workshop Y. If their article is indeed good enough, this may happen. And it will be difficult to manage in the beginning.
At least for the IACR-workshops (CHES, FSE, PKC, TCC), I would like to see an offer from proc.IACT towards them. If they don't take it, that's fine. However, there should be a genuine offer. I agree it should not be in the first year of proc.IACR - things need to fall into place first. But from year two onwards, they should be included.
Secondly, I would like to extend this offer to all workshops that have "in cooperation with" status - see [www.iacr.org
]. Again - it should be an offer, nothing more.
Including more workshops could prove difficult. In particular: If a workshop does not even fulfil the rather minimal criteria of ICW - why should we include it into proc.IACR?
So at the end, there will be some workshops that are formally associated with proc.IACR (maybe on a year-by-year basis) and other workshops that can informally draw from the publications there to increase the number of reviewed talks they have. How they fill the other slots is a different ball game and I am very interested to see different solutions implemented :-)