[address-policy-wg] WG chair re-selection procedure

General support, but a few points which are not covered by the current text:

* Can you have three chairs?
* For how long can you have one chair if the other is hit by a bus?
* How are new chairs bootstrapped in case both are hit by a bus?
* Do chairs alternate in offering to step down?
** What if one chair is controversial and thus the other always is up
for re-election?
** What if neither chair wants to step down?

I tried to fix that (without reformatting to make diff'ing easier):

 The RIPE Address Policy Working Group should attempt to maintain two
-Chairpersons whenever possible. Once per year one of the chairs will
-offer to stand down to allow new candidates to become chair. This will be
+Chairpersons whenever possible with two being the maximum. Once per
year one of the chairs will
+be open for re-election in alternating order.
+In case both chairs become vacant at the same time, the RIPE NCC
should appoint two temporary Chairpersons.
+Open chairs and re-elections will be filled at the earliest
oppurtunity. Both normal and extraordinary re-elections will be
 announced by sending an email to the working group mailing list at least
-two weeks before the start of a RIPE meeting. Anybody is allowed to
-volunteers for the chair position, including the chair who offered to
-stand down. At the next RIPE meeting those present at the working group
+two weeks before the start of the relevant RIPE meeting. Anybody is allowed to
+volunteers for the chair position, including the Chairperson up for
re-election.
+At the next RIPE meeting those present at the working group
 session will determine by consensus who will take the available chair
 position. If no consensus can be reached in the working group session
 then the current chairs will stay to ensure the continued stability of

Or, even better and graphical and whatnot:

https://github.com/RichiH/RIPE/commit/5bdc479ec0eb76a3ebc84795b48596cbe50e77f6


As an aside, Concordet voting is most likely the fairest approach to
all. In this case, bootstrapping would need to be defined, though.
I.e. do the first two win, do they stand as pairs, or would there be
two rounds.


RIchard

PS: Yes, this is Git and a unified diff. Even IETF has started
adopting Git for their WGs. We should, too.