[ripe-chair-discuss] Status of RIPE Chair discussion?

> On 17 May 2017, at 12:35, Nigel Titley <nigel at titley.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 17/05/17 09:33, Shane Kerr wrote:
>> All,
>> 
>> Another RIPE meeting has come and gone, but I don't remember any
>> discussion about the missing RIPE Chair stuff - either the job
>> description or appointment procedure.
>> 
>> Honestly I'm not sure what to do.
> 
> Well, we could all try minding our own business. It may well be that we
> don't need either a job description or appointment procedure.
> 
>> While there does not seem to be a lot of enthusiasm for this work, it
>> seems like the kind of thing that should move forward before it is
>> needed.
> 
> It may never be needed. The time spent would be wasted in that case.
> 
>> 
>> Perhaps we just need to wait for the accountability task force to
>> remind us that we don't have these things? Or do we need to declare the
>> RIPE Chair list a task force so that Daniel will insist that we have a
>> deadline? ;)
>> 
> 
> Could I make a suggestion:
> 
> 1. RIPE Chair job description: Doing the sort of things that the RIPE
> Chair should do.
> 
> 2. RIPE Chair selection process: Selected as needed

I do not find this particularly helpful I’m afraid. This is neither a job description, nor a process. 

And while I also don’t want something over prescriptive, I do think that unless we do away with the concept of a RIPE chair, we need to define it in a way that people can understand it. 


Nurani

> 
> Both of these definitions seem to have worked fine in the past and have
> the benefit of not involving legions of amateur lawyers who might be
> better involved in doing something useful.
> 
> I will now keep quiet and do something useful
> 
> Nigel
>