[ripe-chair-discuss] Status of RIPE Chair discussion?
Nurani Nimpuno nurani at nimblebits.net
Thu May 18 08:15:41 CEST 2017
> On 17 May 2017, at 12:35, Nigel Titley <nigel at titley.com> wrote: > > > > On 17/05/17 09:33, Shane Kerr wrote: >> All, >> >> Another RIPE meeting has come and gone, but I don't remember any >> discussion about the missing RIPE Chair stuff - either the job >> description or appointment procedure. >> >> Honestly I'm not sure what to do. > > Well, we could all try minding our own business. It may well be that we > don't need either a job description or appointment procedure. > >> While there does not seem to be a lot of enthusiasm for this work, it >> seems like the kind of thing that should move forward before it is >> needed. > > It may never be needed. The time spent would be wasted in that case. > >> >> Perhaps we just need to wait for the accountability task force to >> remind us that we don't have these things? Or do we need to declare the >> RIPE Chair list a task force so that Daniel will insist that we have a >> deadline? ;) >> > > Could I make a suggestion: > > 1. RIPE Chair job description: Doing the sort of things that the RIPE > Chair should do. > > 2. RIPE Chair selection process: Selected as needed I do not find this particularly helpful I’m afraid. This is neither a job description, nor a process. And while I also don’t want something over prescriptive, I do think that unless we do away with the concept of a RIPE chair, we need to define it in a way that people can understand it. Nurani > > Both of these definitions seem to have worked fine in the past and have > the benefit of not involving legions of amateur lawyers who might be > better involved in doing something useful. > > I will now keep quiet and do something useful > > Nigel >