[ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair Selection Process

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 9:42 AM Nurani Nimpuno <nurani at nimblebits.net> wrote:
> > On 9 Oct 2018, at 01:09, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
<snip>
> > 1. WGCC appoints nomcom
> > 2. A WG chair throws hat into RIPE Chair ring
> > 3. Nomcom, appointed by WGCC, selects that WG chair as candidate
> > 4. WGCC selects that WG chair as RIPE chair-to-be
> > 5. RIPE Community approves the selection
> >
> > Are you ok with this as an outcome of the process?  I'm not.
>
> I share this concern. This does not sound like a particularly sound process.
>
> Nomcom
> I also share some of the concerns raised by others on the list about the concept of simply adding tasks and responsibilities to the WG chairs and turn them into a Nomcom appointment group.
>
> I understand that it on the surface of things may seem simple and straightforward to use the existing structures we have by just using the WG chairs for this. But I think it is a wrong assumption to make to think that this is better or more straightforward and transparent than a separate, proper Nomcom mechanism.
>
> As others have pointed out, when we select our WG chairs, we do so for their competence and ability to chair a particular WG, not because we elect them as some sort of general “RIPE community elders” to whom we give all the deciding powers in the community in all sorts of different areas. This concept worries me greatly.
>
> I believe having a proper Nomcom mechanism is more in the spirit of the bottom-up and transparent nature of this community.

I've tried to formulate my concern, but it is really down to the
connection between Nomcom and WGCC, I don't like it, and I read that
other also share this concern. Is that correct?
Would it work if we let PC appoint NomCom? There are probably problems
with this that I don't see.


-- 

Roger Jorgensen
rogerj at gmail.com / roger at jorgensen.no