[db-wg] WG Chairs Selection

Hi All


On 21/11/2016 11:11, Job Snijders wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:21:57PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:16:33PM +0100, Horváth Ágoston János wrote:
>>> While this is very insightful (thanks for sharing, Erik), I think we
>>> are switching from professional to a personal level here.
>>>
>>> If anywhere, in RIPE NCC, physical presence should not be viewed as a
>>> number one priority. Even a 'company-sponsored' chair can be denied
>>> travel by employer or have other business to take care of during the
>>> meeting week. If physical presence is an issue, I propose we fix that
>>> problem, not accept and then enforce limitations.
>> We might all wish otherwise, but "chairing a working group" is really
>> best done in presence...
>>
>> Of course it will happen that a WG chair cannot attend - and this is
>> why WGs have two or three co-chairs.  But this needs to be the exception.
>>
>> So, a WG-chair-cancidate needs to be aware that this will busy him two
>> weeks a year, and that this comes with travelling - but I do not see an
>> issue with this in the current candidate set.  They all are not naive
>> newcomers but seasoned DB veterans that have attended enough meetings
>> to understand what will be asked of them.

Job, why don't you just come straight out with it and say you personally 
have an issue with me and you don't want me to be one of the next 
co-chairs. Stop dancing around the issue and trying to make psuedo 
conditions aimed at disqualifying me.

> I do have a problem with a chair who is only willing to travel to

Why are some people so fixated over this point? As Erik said it does 
cost a lot of money to go to a RIPE Meeting. If I don't 'need' to be 
their in person I can follow the whole meeting online. Just as so many 
of the thousands of smaller members have to do. Not all members can 
afford to fly around the world for weeks at a time to attend these 
meetings. As a chair I would need to be their in person and that would 
be my plan.

> meetings if he is a chair, and habitually insulted and bullied RIPE NCC
> staff without remorse.

My anger was directed at one person in particular, the one who sacked 
myself and many other great engineers based on lies. That person is no 
longer with the RIPE NCC now. As far as I am concerned that chapter is 
closed. And as Trump would say, what happened in the past should not 
disbar anyone from doing great things in the future.

Bullying is an interesting topic Job. I am glad you brought that up. It 
reminds me of someone who uses a position to publicly bully and harass 
other RIPE NCC members who prefer and choose to document their routing 
in the RIPE Database rather than in the AFRINIC Database. Not everyone, 
in either the RIPE or AFRINIC community, agrees with the AFRINIC homing 
project.

As a co-chair you have consistently and habitually refused to allow some 
topics to be discussed and blatantly ignored some issues that have been 
professionally raised. The evidence of this is well documented in the 
mailing list archives. This kind of action supports the established and 
wealthier members and deters the smaller and newer members from being 
actively involved in a discussion group that they do not see as very 
welcoming. You own review of the list of NWIs at the recent RIPE Meeting 
with an average of about 2 responses to each topic shows a spectacular 
failure to involve the greater community and drive forward any issue to 
completion. It is clear a new approach is needed.

>
> We should also consider that a knowledgeable working group participant
> does not equal being a great chair.

Someone who uses a position to push their own agenda and is unable to 
step back and take a neutral and impartial view and involve a wider 
range of the membership in decisions also does not equal being a great 
chair.

cheers
denis

>
> Regards,
>
> Job
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20161121/74798f84/attachment.html>