[ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process

Jim,

Marty, I believe you’ve seriously misconstrued the difference between the
> processes for selecting the RIPE NCC and RIPE Chairpeople. :-)


(It's "Martin" and never "Marty").

I read the response from Gert and Daniel.  Please realize that in the big
scheme of things, I don't care about the difference between RIPE and RIPE
NCC … kinda like I don't care about the difference between PA and PI space.
Both of those differences are totally made-up constructs.

But I digress. You asked:

That said, I suppose we could rip this up and start again. But there would
> have to be compelling reasons to take such drastic action. Let’s hear them.


So let me quote you back to you ...

IMO they’re doing the best job they can given the circumstances.


As this is a 100% soft process (i.e. you're not rack-n-stacking equipment
in a datacenter), I think the "circumstances" are immaterial.

For instance it’s not their fault the community didn’t nominate a more
> diverse set of candidates.


Correct - not a diverse bunch. I believe nearly all nomcoms have the power
to say "sorry, we must reopen the process".

Or some of those candidates are somehow “tainted” because of their
> perceived links to the NCC.


Your words; but I agree (except I maybe would remove the word "perceived").

Anyone who thought the process was defective or the pool of candidates
> wasn’t good enough has had plenty of opportunities to say so.


I'll happily say it now ... it's a poor pool of candidates.

That hasn't happened AFAICT. It’s probably too late in the day to raise
> objections now while that process is well under way.


Is it? If so, why are we discussing this and why does this mailing list
exist?

I, for one, simply don't like how this looks. I believe any well-minded
noncom would also realize that and correct themselves and reset the process.

Martin


On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:10 AM Jim Reid <jim at rfc1035.com> wrote:

>
>
> > On 13 May 2020, at 18:43, Martin J. Levy <mahtin at mahtin.com> wrote:
> >
> > I believe you seriously misconstrued the difference between some random
> task-force and the process of selection of a Chairman of an entity with an
> approximately 35 million euro budget and 25,000'ish members.
>
> Marty, I believe you’ve seriously misconstrued the difference between the
> processes for selecting the RIPE NCC and RIPE Chairpeople. :-)
>
> > I'm not sure the nomcom has done a good job so far.
>
> IMO they’re doing the best job they can given the circumstances. For
> instance it’s not their fault the community didn’t nominate a more diverse
> set of candidates. Or some of those candidates are somehow “tainted”
> because of their perceived links to the NCC. Anyone who thought the process
> was defective or the pool of candidates wasn’t good enough has had plenty
> of opportunities to say so. That hasn't happened AFAICT. It’s probably too
> late in the day to raise objections now while that process is well under
> way.
>
> That said, I suppose we could rip this up and start again. But there would
> have to be compelling reasons to take such drastic action. Let’s hear them.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/ripe-chair-discuss/attachments/20200513/74f66d6a/attachment.html>