[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 don’t think we should forget those who are active in the community
> that can’t attend the RIPE meetings for whatever reason, by active I
> mean via the mailing lists or remote meeting participation.
> 
> So I think the criteria should be to have been active in the RIPE
> community over the last x years by attending at least y RIPE meetings
> OR by being active on a RIPE mailing list in the last x years.

i am not sure i see a major clue level difference between attendees
and mailing list participants.  but i am a poor judge as i am good at
avoiding.  but i take jim's point that the chair is the *meeting*
chair.  rob used to do a fair bit of external relations; not sure
about hph, and not sure what is really needed.

randy