[ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair Selection Process

>> it is somewhat odd that meeting attendance is the criterion in a
>> community which claims that the mailing lists are the place where
>> work is done.  and, of course, this is re-discussed.
> 
> Yes, there is a contradiction there. Sort of. However for RIPE, we're
> appointing a Chair whose responsibilities largely focus around RIPE
> meetings, not the work or policy-making that supposedly gets done on
> RIPE's mailing lists. Drawing from the people who regularly
> participate in RIPE meetings for both the Nomcom and Chair seems the
> most sensible choice to me.

i was merely pointing out yet another ietf procedural oddity.  i am not
against the ripe community using N out of M meetings as the principal
qualifier for a nomcom pool.  i suspect there might be some discussion
of *which* meetings from folk distant from the amsterdam/rome/lisbon
axis.  i am in less of a position to take sides in that one than a scot
is. :)

randy