[address-policy-wg] WG chair re-selection procedure

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:57:08AM +0200, Filiz Yilmaz wrote:
> Can you explain your thoughts in this context and the reason for your choice of consensus over any other selection process which could be anonymous for those doing the selection?

Well, the assumption is that we're not going to have an in-rush of 
volunteers, so in many cases it will be "one of the existing chairs
is asking for re-affirmation and the WG is happy" or "one of the
existing chairs is stepping down, and the WG is fine with the single 
volunteer for replacement".

We do not want to spend large amounts of precious WG time on voting
with paper ballots, counting, etc. - which could easily take half an
hour or more.

So, we go for "the participants agree on a candidate, in whatever form 
this will be expressed (humming, show of hands, withdrawal of the other
candidates, ...)", and if that turns out to be non-working, we'll have 
to come up with a formal tie breaking mechanism by the next meeting.

(This actually was one of the reasons why the WG chair collective could
not agree on a common policy.  Half of us wanted something lightweight
and not time consuming, while the other half wanted "something more
formal").

Gert Doering
        -- APWG chair
-- 
have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 811 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20140916/f9b67b21/attachment.sig>