[ripe-chair-discuss] The RIPE Chair Selection Process - v0.4

On 25/03/2019 13:03, Nigel Titley wrote:
> ...

> As an outgoing member of the EB that doesn't intend to restand I don't
> have any irons in the fire here. I think this is a totally inappropriate
> role for the EB. The EB is there to ensure that the financial affairs of
> the RIPE NCC are conducted in a sober and businesslike fashion. To be
> the confirming body is completely outside its remit.
> 
> Nigel

[no seasonal joke!]

Nigel,

Of course you are correct. The role of RIPE NCC Executive Board (EB)
is to oversee the RIPE NCC and its finances in particular. So currently
any role in the RIPE Chair selection process is outside the remit of the EB.

However, the RIPE community could *ask* the EB to take on an additional
role. That role would be to oversee the RIPE Chair selection process.
This would *not* mean that the EB has any part in selecting the RIPE
Chair. It would mean that the EB would appoint the non-voting SelCom
chairperson, deal with process challenges and finally confirm that the
selection process has been run correctly.

Jim Reid's concerns are a good indication that we need such a role.
I suggest the EB because I cannot see another existing body that could
fulfil it in a credible way.

The IETF 'uses' the ISOC board of trustees (BoT) for this role in the
IAB selection process. The ISOC BoT has a primary role that is similar
to the EB: oversee ISOC and in particular its finances. Yet the ISOC BoT
has agreed to take on the additional role of overseeing the IAB
selection process.

I believe that this way of doing things would work for us as well.
It would make my task of adapting the IETF process to our needs much
easier if we would at least contemplate this.

I am currently working on the document that describes the SelCom. My
plan is to write in a role for the RIPE NCC EB as described here. It
would be very useful for me to hear from you, *and from others*, whether
this has any chance of at least being considered. Otherwise I would have
to become much more inventive than I am currently comfortable with. ;-)

Of course I remain curious about and open to other ideas on how to deal
with process challenges and the concerns expressed by Jim.

Best

Daniel