[db-wg] Chair Selection Process Revision Proposal

Dear Bill,

On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 05:40:39PM +0000, William Sylvester via db-wg wrote:
> At the RIPE75 in Dubai, the working group chairs committed to
> presenting a proposal for revising the chair selection process and
> general housekeeping of the Database working group. This was motivated
> from some of the challenges we experienced as a working group over the
> past year. After taking a review of the other RIPE community working
> groups, the proposal below represents what we feel Is a fair approach
> to revise our current processes. This also includes clarification on
> matters where previously our processes were unclear. This also
> includes comments and feedback from members of the working group.
> 
> Please express your support or otherwise for these changes, the intent
> is to use this process for future chair selection including the
> pending selection process due.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> William & Denis
> DB-WG Co-Chairs
> 
> Proposed revision to the Database Working Group chair selection process;
> 
> 1) Number of chairs is a minimum of 2 with a maximum of 3.
> 2) Chair can be removed at any time by consensus.
> 3) Chair terms are staggered yearly.
> 4) One chair per year is replaced.
> 5) Working group selects chair by consensus.
> 6) The consensus judgement will be made by the serving WG co-chair(s) and will exclude the co-chair(s) who is the subject of that consensus judgement.
> 7) Selection process is as follow;
> 7.1) Interested parties have two weeks to make their interest known via the mailing list, or directly to the Chair/s.
> 7.2) After two weeks, the Chair/s ensure that all candidates are announced on the mailing list and issue a call for discussion.
> 7.3) WG members express their approval or otherwise of the presented candidates.
> 7.4) Two weeks after the call for discussion, the Chair/s declare a decision, based on mailing list discussion, as they would do for a policy proposal.
> 8) Any appeal over a consensus decision will be heard by the RIPE Chair (or their deputy) whose decision shall be final.
> 9) In the case more than one chair is up for selection at the same time, the chair with the greatest support will take a multi-year term, the chair with the least support will take the second longest term. Terms will be determined by the number of chairs (3 chairs = 3 year term, 2 chairs = 2 year teams). The intent is to maintain continuity of the working group chairs. So the working group is never left without a chair.

I think the above is an improvement over the current process.

Kind regards,

Job