[ripe-chair-discuss] Status of RIPE Chair discussion?
Nigel Titley nigel at titley.com
Thu May 18 10:54:16 CEST 2017
On 18/05/17 08:54, João Damas wrote: > Let’s see if I can spell the “simple proposal” in a different way. > > I believe what Daniel is saying is that this is the sort of role that is better defined by carrying it out day after day. > > If at some point the chair were to take a decision or action that alienated enough people then those people would raise the issue. A wise chair would spot potential conflict before it happened and engage in consultation before making the decision or having that decision/action carried out by other parties, thus covering both actions by RIPE as well as actions directed towards RIPE from elsewhere. That is sort of a self-regulating mechanism when the majority of parties are reasonable. It makes the role flexible enough to deal with emerging issues. > > I think this has been shown to work in several contexts and the one missing bit for this to fully work would be a mechanism to ensure openness, perhaps a spot at the plenary of the RIPE meetings were the focus is on reporting by the chair and the interaction between chair and community where that relationship is renewed. This and a list where any subscriber can post to between meetings. A mechanism not only to censor if necessary but also to show support (always necessary), all in the open. > I really like this suggestion. It is open and transparent, flexible and not overly prescriptive. Nigel