[ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair Selection Process

> On 8 Oct 2018, at 19:02, Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 8 Oct 2018, at 17:57, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>>> "The RIPE community will endorse the candidate put forward by the WG
>>>>> Chair collective."
>>>> oh, you mean the collective that appoints the nomcom?
>>>> you can see where this appears a bit loose and sloppy
>>> 
>>> No Randy, I don’t.
>> 
>> then let me try again.
>> 
>> is the candidate put forward by the wg chair collective or by a nomcom.
>> i keep hearing stereo.
> 
> How hard can it be?
> 
> The selection process
> 
> After a shortlist of potential candidates has been identified, the NomCom will hand it over to the WG Chair collective.
> 
> The WG Chair collective will actively gather feedback from the RIPE community about each candidate. Based on this feedback, the WG Chair collective will select the best candidate for the job.


That’s not how I remember the discussion nor how the IETF nomcom mechanism works.

> 
> The RIPE community will endorse the candidate put forward by the WG Chair collective.
> 

In a formal sense, the same way that, for instance, ISOC rubber stamps the selections of the nomcom before passing them on to the public (ISOC has to do that as caretaker of the IETF, probably going to change with the new scheme). It is just a sanity check not a selection process beyond the nomcom. 
At RIPE we would have the final say with the community, which would be a step beyond what IETF does. 
At least that is how I interpreted the discussions.

> 
> In short, the Nomcom comes up with a short list. The WGCC chooses someone from that list (or tells the Nomcom to come up with a better list). The WGCC choice goes to the RIPE Community for final approval.


We are a bit out of sync, I believe. Bit of a problem for a last call.

Joao