[anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Brian Nisbet
brian.nisbet at heanet.ie
Mon Sep 29 18:12:34 CEST 2014
Dave, Thanks for your commentary on this, much appreciated! Dave Crocker wrote the following on 26/09/2014 14:42: > On 9/26/2014 2:23 AM, Brian Nisbet wrote: >> Tobias & I would like to present the text below as a starting point for >> this discussion > > These are always fun exercises... They are, but necessary ones, I think. > >> Note on Language: Throughout this document the word Chair shall be used >> for both Chairs and Co-Chairs. >> >> ** Introduction: >> >> This document aims to provide outline procedures to deal with the tenure >> of RIPE Working Group Chairs. It applies to all RIPE Working Groups. > > This document outlines procedures dealing with the tenure... I think I'm missing your point here? >> ** WG Chair Term: >> >> The normal term for a WG Chair is three years, after which the WG Chair >> must resign. A WG Chair may stand for re-selection after resignation. A >> WG Chair may resign voluntarily at any time. > > As phrased, this means that there is a gap between resignation and > filling the spot with the replacement chair. And if the resignation is > 'forced' it isn't really a resignation; it's just the end of their term. > > Perhaps: > > The term of a WG Chair is three years. A current chair may stand for > re-selection at the end of their term. A WG Chair may resign > voluntarily at any time. The "gap" should be no longer than a RIPE meeting and isn't really a big thing. The wording change, yup, I've no problem with that. >> ** Selection of a WG Chair: >> >> WG Chair vacancies, along with a call for candidates, should be > > should -> must > > Seems essential to make the minimum announcement time mandatory. Ah, yes, this isn't an RFC, so language thing, perfectly happy with must. >> announced on the WG mailing list at least one month in advance of the >> date upon which the selection will be held. The announcement should set >> a closing date for candidates. A WG may request that a WG Chair vacancy > > a WG Chair vacancy -> an additional WG Chair position Ok. > >> be opened so long as the addition of a new Chair would not cause the >> number of Chairs of that WG to exceed the maximum number specified in >> this document. > > I didn't see where that maximum was specified. There's a reason I left out this line: Reference Documents: Working Group Chair Job Description and Procedures (RIPE-542) I've no idea what that reason was, mind, but I'm sure it exists. Anyway, RIPE-542 specifies a maximum of three. >> WG Chairs are elected at WG sessions at RIPE meetings. Anyone physically >> present at the WG session is eligible to participate in the selection >> process. The candidate does not need to be physically present at the WG >> session. >> >> If possible the Chair should be elected by acclamation by the WG or by >> consensus after discussion. If the result is unclear, then a secret >> ballot should be held. In the case of a ballot, votes will be counted by >> RIPE NCC Staff and/or Chairs of other WGs. The result will be determined >> by simple majority. >> >> ** Removal of a WG Chair: >> >> A WG Chair may be unable to fulfil their duties as described in this >> document or otherwise fail to serve the WG and the community. With the >> endorsement of a significant share of the WG, a vote of no confidence >> may be initiated. >> >> Before a vote of no confidence is taken, due effort should be made to >> address the issue(s) leading to the vote. The right of reply must be >> given to all parties involved in the procedure. If this effort fails to >> resolve the issue, the vote may proceed. >> >> The vote must be requested on the WG mailing list at least one week in >> advance of the WG Session at a RIPE meeting and should take place during >> the WG session. Anyone physically present at the WG session may take > > This obviously allows a form of ballot-box stuffing, by permitting votes > from people who have not been involved in the wg up to that point. I > have no idea how to prevent this, however. In addition, it can be > argued that anyone garnering enough ire to motivate the ballot-stuffing > effort probably is causing serious problems. The counter to that is > that they might be standing up to efforts to coerce the wg... It does, potentially, and this has been a bone of contention in other discussions. I have no idea how to prevent it either. Possibly more to the point I have no evidence to suggest it would or would not happen. Bussing in people at €350 a pop to remain co-chair of a RIPE WG would seem... frankly insane. That's not to say it'll never happen, of course, but wow. There is, btw, the notion of popping in a consensus stage before the voting stage in a no-confidence motion. It doesn't remove the vote stuffing concern, of course, but it brings the whole thing more in line with preferred RIPE procedure. Brian
- Previous message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
- Next message (by thread): [anti-abuse-wg] Appointment & Removal of Working Group Chairs
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]