[ncc-services-wg] WG Chair appointment process

> On 5 Sep 2017, at 12:30, Denesh Bhabuta <dblists at icloud.com> wrote:
> 
> That said, should we be looking at term limits etc in the future, to allow new blood to come forward too? All too easy for newcomers not to put themselves forward when more experienced people and those doing it for years are still up for the task.

Hi Denesh. I agree that term limits are a good thing, largely for the reasons you've outlined. [It also helps to have a healthy turnover in the leadership from time to time.] However the WG did not make provision for this in its chair appointment process. I don't know (or care) why it did that: presumably there were good reasons for reaching consensus on that process. It would probably be unwise to revisit the WG chair appointment process given the potential for shed-painting and rat-holing. If it's not broken, don't "fix" it.

I would like to think we can trust the WG leadership to know when they'd overstayed their welcome and to step aside in an orderly manner. I did that in the DNS WG even though that WG's process does have provision for term limits.