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

On 18.05.17 12:43 , Rob Evans wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> This conversation seems to be ratholing between “some process” and “no process.”
> 
> As was pointed out earlier, when Rob announced Hans Petter as his successor, one of the first tasks placed on him was to have “some process” in place before we as a community need to exercise it.  This process should not be burdensome, it need not be wordy, but I imagine it warrants more than a couple of sentences given the role of the RIPE Chairperson.  Our institutional memories may mean we tend to skip over what outsiders to the community believe is important simply because to us it’s obvious.
> 
> I think we have already had some good suggestions as part of this discussion (although I don’t want to rat-hole on which dances should form part of the dance-off).  Bringing together some of what we’ve seen so far:
> 
>   1.    The RIPE Chairperson’s job description is as detailed in the description on the RIPE website[1], but not limited by that as the requirements of the community change.  The emphasis is on maintaining an open, inclusive, community and dialogue.
> 
>   2.    The RIPE Chairperson is appointed by his/her predecessor, but serves the RIPE community.
> 
>   3.    The RIPE Chairperson may appoint and dismiss a vice chair.
> 
> [1] https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/chair/draft-ripe-chair-function-description
> 
> [Ah, as I write this I see others have come up with largely the same, is this what consensus looks like?]
> 
> Rob
> 

I do *not at all* like
https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/chair/draft-ripe-chair-function-description.

It is waaaaayyyyy too prescriptive and reads like a job ad. It is the
absolute opposite of KISS.

It is also quite dangerous: Imagine the ways real antagonists could
abuse this to entangle the RIPE chair in useless but endless debate and
discredit RIPE in the process. If you do not believe in antagonists to
RIPE or the RIPE chair, substitute well meaning community members.

I strongly suggest we avoid references to this text.

Otherwise I think we have positive movement and maybe even rough
consensus???????

Daniel

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ripe-chair-discuss/attachments/20170518/70146407/attachment.sig>