This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ripe-chair-discuss@ripe.net/
[ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Jim Reid
jim at rfc1035.com
Wed May 13 19:48:54 CEST 2020
> On 13 May 2020, at 18:22, Nurani Nimpuno <nurani at nimblebits.net> wrote: > > On a related note, I am also concerned about the very small number of candidates that has been put forward for the positions of chair and vice chair. And I do think we need to ask ourselves if the process has been robust enough if the long list of candidates is this short. While a short list of candidates is not ideal Nurani, the metric here should be quality, not quantity. Choosing from a small pool of excellent candidates surely has to be better than picking from a large pool filled with dross or make-weights. YMMV. You’ve also got to consider the practicalities. The most desirable candidates need to have several key attributes. IMO these include their standing in the community, a deep understanding of RIPE’s values and processes, an inexhaustible ability to cat-herd, diplomacy, patience, leadership, fairness, integrity, time/energy to do the job, etc, etc. There simply aren’t that many people around who have enough of these qualities. I think that goes a long way to explaining why the NomCom ended up with so few candidates to consider.
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]