[ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair Selection Process

> On 8 Oct 2018, at 22:44, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
> 
> It doesn't help - as Randy noted - that the WGCC's involvement stops any active WG chair from putting their name into the hat

There is *nothing* in the current proposal which says this. Now perhaps that language isn't clear enough. But it looks clear to me. I quote: "There are no constraints on the size and composition of the NomCom.” and "the WG Chair collective will select the best candidate for the job”. The current proposal says nothing either way about whether a WG Chair can or cannot be that best candidate.

> We may wish to put a line into the RIPE chair description to say that that person cannot be a WG Chair, but categorically excluding all WG chairs from the RIPE Chair process will either lead to an impoverishment of candidates or else a rush to resign WG Chair status in order to throw one's hat into the ring. Neither of these things is necessary or sensible.

And neither of these things is being suggested. As I said earlier, if the wording lacks clarity -- and judging by your comments Nick it is defective because it appears to be confusing/misleading for some -- please suggest replacement clarifying text.

There’s *nothing* in the text that says a WG Chair is excluded from consideration for the RIPE Chair. And there’s nothing saying only a WG Chair could be considered either. I think both of these omissions is intentional. Perhaps the text needs to be made more explicit.

> Nor does it help the transparency problem that it is not possible to be part of either the nomcom control mechanism or the Chair selection process unless you also happen to be a WG chair.

The current proposal doesn’t say that either.

> What if someone of good standing wants to be able on the panel which selects the final candidate, but cannot commit to the ongoing requirements of being a WG chair?

They can serve on the Nomcom and go back to their dayjob once the Nomcom has done what it was tasked with doing. No WG Chairs need to be introduced, replaced or removed to make that happen.

Unless the selection process says something is explicitly forbidden, I would hope we can work on the understanding that anything is permitted. Within reason of course. Maybe some text along these lines needs to be added somewhere?

FWIW here’s my understanding of the current proposal:

0) Anyone can become RIPE Chair.

1) The Nomcom and WGCC are two distinct entities each with its own discrete membership. Though there might be people who serve on both if the community decides that's wise or desirable.

2) Anyone can serve on the Nomcom, modulo the usual common sense provisos about conflicts of interest and reasonable community standing. They DO NOT have to be a WG Chair. Or be appointed as a WG Chair in order to serve on the Nomcom. [IMO more than one or two WG Chairs on the Nomcom would be unwelcome because a much broader base is needed.]

3) A WG Chair or two *might* serve on the Nomcom. As could someone from the PC. Or perhaps someone from the NCC. Whatever. Presumably they’d be on the Nomcom not because they were a WG Chair (say), but because they had reasonable community standing, no conflicts of interest and their participation helped make the Nomcom’s composition more representative of the RIPE Community.

4) The WGCC would apply some sort of sanity check on those volunteering to be on the Nomcom - ie taking account of possible conflicts of interest and reasonable community standing concerns again. And for bonus points (handwave, handwave) try to ensure the Nomcom reasonably reflected the diversity of the RIPE community. That role for the WGCC may also be necessary if the Nomcom gets chosen at random from a pool of volunteers.

5) The Nomcom can pick whoever they want for the shortlist, irrespective of whatever hats those choices might or might not be wearing. The Nomcom’s remit is simple and obvious: find the best possible candidates for the role.