This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG Session at RIPE 69
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Gilles Massen
gilles.massen at restena.lu
Mon Oct 13 11:10:48 CEST 2014
Hi Brian (and WG), On 10/09/2014 11:48 PM, Brian Nisbet wrote: > Thanks for this. It's... not straight forward, but always happy to talk > about these things. Which makes you a good chair :) > Unfortunately for me physical presence is important, if in no small part > to allay the previously vouched fears regarding "bussing people in" > which would be far easier virtually than physically. I wouldn't say easier - but certainly less expensive. Which is my major grievance with the local presence: it excludes people on economic grounds. And probably the global impact increases roughly with the distance to Amsterdam. Besides, it seems to me that meeting attendance is heavily influenced by the location - so that local participants are always overrepresented. > While policy decision and, of course, discussion takes place on the > mailing list, the work of the Working Group, traditionally in both AA-WG > and other WGs the appointment of new Chairs (or removal) has taken place > at meetings, something I would be keen to continue. Apparently that is one of the points where WGs have no clear common ground. It also feels a bit 'unbalanced': obviously the policy making is were real "damage" could be done, and nothing protects that from 'bussing people in' - except the consensus declaring. Chairs on the other hand are rather the 'wise guides' (and that is in no way meant to belittle your work!) than dictators, so their "powers" are limited. So are the chair positions really attractive for hostile takeover? So in the interest of an open and inclusive community I still think that a large consensus should be tried first, and voting more or less reserved to removal and cases when there are >1 suitable candidate (where you could also roll the dice, IMHO). Or at the very least allow remote participants to, well, participate. That would require some additional effort over simple mailing-list stuffing. Finally: I won't try to object to your plans, and I do recognize your experience. My hope is to maintain and extend the openness and friendliness of the RIPE WGs as far as reasonable. best, Gilles -- Fondation RESTENA - DNS-LU 6, rue Coudenhove-Kalergi L-1359 Luxembourg tel: (+352) 424409 fax: (+352) 422473
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Draft Agenda - AA-WG Session at RIPE 69
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]