[ripe-chair-discuss] Chair nomination process

> On 13 May 2020, at 23:39, Nigel Titley <nigel at titley.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 13/05/2020 19:48, Martin J. Levy wrote:
> 
>> I'll happily say it now ... it's a poor pool of candidates.
> 
> I'm hoping you didn't mean that it's a pool of poor candidates
> 

That would be making this personal which I don’t believe is anywhere close where Nick was expressing concerns and, dare I say, a notch below what we are used from a beacon like you.

And while I am here, I have to agree with Nick’s concerns. While almost each individual piece looks reasonable by itself, the aggregate has vast room for improvement. I am aware of people who just decided not to get involved upon seeing the landscape and that, for me, is a sign of trouble (feel free to shrug this aside by inserting standard response “I can’t make other people do things that are up to them”)

The process itself is sufficiently documented and was developed in public (*) but the combined result certainly has a created a component of uneasiness, which is what I feel and what I felt Nick was getting at.

Just my (outsider) 2 cents
Joao

(*) some time in the future one could debate the difference between a public process and an open one.