[address-policy-wg] WG Chair Collective (Re: WG chair re-selection procedure)

On 16/09/2014 11:36, Jim Reid wrote:
> On 16 Sep 2014, at 11:03, Nick Hilliard <nick at inex.ie> wrote:
>
>> Interesting.  Can you post the URL to the archives where we can read
>> up about what happened?
>
> The WG Chairs Collective has just begun to publish the minutes of its
> meetings -- long story. The fag-end of their discussion can be found
> at:

> https://www.ripe.net/ripe/groups/wg/cc/summaries
>
> I don't know if the ad-hoc group got around to publishing its
> deliberations.

The ad-hoc group - of which I was a member - fine tuned some existing 
proposals for handling WG Chair rotation.

The problem set that we wanted to handle was:

- no automatic resignation for WG chairs, which has led to some WG chairs 
sitting in their positions for upwards of 15 years.  This is fundamentally 
incompatible with good governance.

- no standardised procedure for selecting new WG chairs

- no standardised procedure for removing new WG chairs (which has happened 
before on an ad-hoc basis)

- not having to deal with 20 different WG chair selection procedures for 
the ~20 different working groups (both active and inactive).

- ensuring that each working group has a selection procedure.

- some other odds and ends (e.g. WGs with no chair, etc)

A brief note was made of this in the ripe-67 WG Chairs minutes:

--
- The task-force should look at the final documents, give it some editing 
as needed, and have the RIPE Chair publish it on the ripe-list with an 
explanation and a deadline of one month.
--

The next note on this issue appeared in the ripe-68 WG chair minutes:

--
- The Collective agreed to work with their respective WGs to establish a 
procedure for replacing WG Chairs.

- The minimum requirements are that each WG should have its own procedures, 
that these should be written down, that this should be done by the next 
RIPE Meeting and executed at the end of that meeting.
--

I'd like to see the ad-hoc group proposals published and the mail archives 
of the WG Chairs opened up, so that the RIPE community can make an informed 
decision about whether this is best approach for handling WG Chair rotation.

It is not appropriate to expect the RIPE community to be satisfied with 
what you correctly refer to as fag-ends of a discussion.

This is an issue which goes beyond the remit of AP-WG.  It would be more 
appropriate to discuss it on ripe-list at ripe.net.

Nick