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/[email protected]/
[ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nigel Titley
nigel at titley.com
Thu Oct 19 12:21:04 CEST 2017
On 19/10/2017 10:27, Carsten Schiefner wrote: > Hi Nigel, > > On 19.10.2017 10:36, Nigel Titley wrote: >> The NCC Board does of course take account of policies, and also comments >> on them as part of the evaluation process that the NCC does during >> policy development. In all cases up until now we have instructed the NCC >> to follow policy. However, as board members we have certain fiduciary >> duties which cannot be overridden by policy. Faced with a situation such >> as Jim describes we have two choices: not implement the policy or resign >> and hope that someone else agrees to carry the can. > maybe that would be something then that could be put into the board's > rules of internal procedure: that the board sees to have all RIPE > policies be implemented by the NCC to the greatest extend possible, but > limited to the board's fiduciary duties? > If it makes people happier then I'm sure we could do this. I'm generally against additional complication, especially where past practice doesn't give cause to worry, but as I say it doesn't really bother me. Nigel
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]