[anti-abuse-wg] Authorities, or lack thereof

If that is the same case I am thinking of, it was quite strange that

1. The chair himself was not present at the meeting

2. The discussion to remove the co chair was raised during AOB, in overtime

3.. Several prominent members normally active in various other wgs just
happened (by pure chance, i take it) to be present, to quickly reach
consensus that the chair be removed. Seeing all of them in the same room ..
Well, I am not surprised that Sascha thought it was a plenary session.

Hopefully the wg has moved on from that, but I see the discussion has come
full circle right back to that painful episode.

--srs

On Friday, June 21, 2013, Sascha Luck wrote:

> Hi Nigel,
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 04:03:58PM +0000, Nigel Titley wrote:
>
>  Sorry to be pedantic, but the "membership" (usually understood to be
>> the members of the RIPE NCC) have no power over a WG. I think you may
>> mean the "community", which does.
>>
>
> You're right of course, it's the community in Plenary.
>
>  And the WG chair who was fired (in Rome if I recall correctly) was
>> actually fired by his own WG, not the plenary.
>>
>
> I wasn't at the meeting, just watching the stream. I thought it was taken
> to the Plenary, but ICBW.
>
> rgds,
> Sascha Luck
>
>

-- 
--srs (iPad)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/anti-abuse-wg/attachments/20130622/df08578c/attachment.html>