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

On 24/05/2017 04:34, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
> Not in my mind. The charter of the accountability task force reads to me as a 'find holes' mission. We have narrowly avoided the charter to slso say 'and plug them for us'.

I don't think anyone has yet established that there are any holes that
need filling.

I suggest the first job of the taskforce is to articulate a proposition
for what we consider are the "fundamental ideas behind the RIPE & RIPE
NCC system of self-governance", as you put it. Then it can analyse what
we have, and see if there are any discrepancies[*] between what those
principles call for and what actually exists.

This thread has given voice to a strong suspicion that there are no such
gaps. If that is found to be accurate, then the remaining job of the
taskforce will lie in communicating how the two match (for example, for
the benefit of newcomers).

If discrepancies between principles and practice are found, there are
actually two possibilities: it may be that there is a gap that needs to
be plugged, but it may instead indicate that our idea of what our
fundamental principles are is inaccurate, and should be changed to match
what we have.

There are likely to be consequences (pros and cons) to either approach,
so the taskforce should also set out for the community what are the
likely consequences of either path.

The taskforce can lay all this out for the community. Indeed, it is a
good structure for performing this work precisely because it clearly has
no authority to actually make any governing decision, much less impose
any new processes or structures.

Malcolm

[*] By way of example of what I mean by "discrepancy", I perceive an
inconsistency between your assertion that RIPE is fundamentally a
bottom-up organisation and your proposal that the job of identifying
community principles should be transferred from a taskforce that was
open to participation by any community volunteers, and handed to the WG
Chairs Collective for a top-down Voice of Authority.

It may be that this discrepancy is resolved by saying that the taskforce
is a more appropriate vehicle than the WG Chairs Collective for this
type of work. Alternatively, it could be resolved by saying that RIPE
self-governance is not really bottom-up, it is a self-perpetuating
oligarchy, and that it's only the work of the Working Groups that is
actually bottom-up. That's the kind of choice the community will need to
make. It's not the job of the taskforce to make it for the community,
only to present the options clearly so that the community understands
what it is asserting.


> 
> The charter also excludes looking at the RIPE NCC, which is an essential part of the success story because it allows RIPE itself to stay simple and informal. I am not saying that the NCC needs changing! 
> 
> Whst I think is missing is a description of the underlying principles, how they came about  and how they made RIPE work so well.
> 
> This is a related but different thing. It certsinly is something that clould be *extremely helpful* for the task force. 
> 
> dfk
> 
> 
> ---
> Sent from a handheld device.
> 
>> On 24. May 2017, at 01:54, Carsten Schiefner <ripe-wgs.cs at schiefner.de> wrote:
>>
>> Daniel -
>>
>>> On 22.05.2017 22:58, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I also realise that we are missing a "design document" for fundamental
>>> ideas behind the RIPE & RIPE NCC system of self-governance. It is all
>>> passed on by word-of-mouth and experience. I am quite willing to help
>>> write something like this together with a couple of WG chairs; then have
>>> the community discuss it. Any takers?
>>
>> isn't this in a pretty close vicinity to what the Accountability TF is
>> tasked with and is working on?
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>    -C.
>>
> 
> 


-- 
            Malcolm Hutty | tel: +44 20 7645 3523
   Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
 London Internet Exchange | http://publicaffairs.linx.net/

                 London Internet Exchange Ltd
           Monument Place, 24 Monument Street London EC3R 8AJ

         Company Registered in England No. 3137929
       Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA