[ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carlos Friacas
cfriacas at fccn.pt
Wed Nov 16 08:49:05 CET 2016
Hi, On Wed, 16 Nov 2016, Jim Reid wrote: (...) > > When we talk of "election" before deciding that this is the way to go, > it unfairly biases the discussion in that direction. It creates a > mindset/environment which excludes other possibilities or discourages > people from suggesting them. Making it a "not-so-appropriate-word" to use during a discussion, may also create some bias :-)) Again, i didn't say an electi*n is an absolute need, nor did i say that it was my preference. Please note i only mentioned it as a possibility if two (or more) people *with* a proven track record within the community (and that to me is being a WG Chair, but probably not exclusively...) step up. (...) > > IMO, the enthusiasts for electing the RIPE Chair need to first solve > the eligibility criteria. This is a difficult, perhaps impossible, > problem to solve in a forum like RIPE which is completely open and has > no membership. Everyone (in theory) has a voice. If there are no voices against... I also don't think that we absolutely need to close any eligibility criteria at a 1st try. :-) Cheers, Carlos
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]