<html><head></head><body> <div><br></div><div>Hi Daniel,</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks for taking the time to read the minutes and the draft documents.</div><div><br></div><div>Just to clarify: theses two documents will be published as RIPE documents shortly including all the necessary meta data. They will then disappear from the folder marked Draft and Discussion Files.</div><div><br></div><div>I take your point though that even temporary draft documents should be complete with list of authors <caret></caret>etc.</div><div><br></div><div>Kind regards,</div><div>Mirjam</div><div><br></div><div><br></div>On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 16:52, Daniel Karrenberg <<a href="mailto:dfk@ripe.net" class="">dfk@ripe.net</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="protonmail_quote" type="cite"> <br><br>On 9 Apr 2021, at 9:37, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:<br><br>> Dear colleagues,<br>><br>> The RIPE Working Group Chairs met in March to discuss recommendations<br>> for possible changes to the RIPE Policy Development Process. …<br><br>Mirjam,<br><br>Thank you for sharing this meeting summary.<br><br>I have looked at<br>https://www.ripe.net/publications/draft-and-discussion-files/review-of-the-ripe-appeals-procedure<br>.<br>This is another example of a bad habit we have gotten into. In Rob’s<br>time the RIPE community has only discussed documents that said clearly<br><br> - Who had written the text,<br> - on Whose request,<br> - for What purpose, and<br> - When it had been written, released or published.<br><br>Referring to documents without this basic information and discussing<br>them is a bad habit. It is easily perceived as not transparent. The<br>‘WWWW’ information is also essential for understanding and<br>discussing any text.<br><br>My advice to the community in general and the Chair in particular is to<br>insist that all documents we discuss in the context of RIPE have this<br>information.<br><br>Daniel<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div></body></html>