<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>If this were another region, I might agree. Solving problems we don't currently have is a distraction. </div><div><br></div><div>I like the proposed approach. It is simple and provides opportunity for change and provides for continuity. I'm in favor of it. </div><div><br></div><div>Best, </div><div><br></div><div>-M<</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br>On Sep 15, 2014, at 14:38, "Scott Leibrand" <<a href="mailto:scottleibrand@gmail.com">scottleibrand@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr">Who determines whether consensus on a new chair has been reached? If a vocal minority objects to replacing the current chair and blocks consensus on a new one, does that mean he could continue chairing the WG indefinitely?<div><br></div><div>-Scott</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Sander Steffann <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sander@steffann.nl" target="_blank">sander@steffann.nl</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello working group,<br>
<br>
The collective of RIPE working group chairpersons has decided that each RIPE<br>
working group should have some rules regarding the re-selection of the<br>
chairs. Gert and I have come up with the following:<br>
<br>
The RIPE Address Policy Working Group should attempt to maintain two<br>
Chairpersons whenever possible. Once per year one of the chairs will<br>
offer to stand down to allow new candidates to become chair. This will be<br>
announced by sending an email to the working group mailing list at least<br>
two weeks before the start of a RIPE meeting. Anybody is allowed to<br>
volunteers for the chair position, including the chair who offered to<br>
stand down. At the next RIPE meeting those present at the working group<br>
session will determine by consensus who will take the available chair<br>
position. If no consensus can be reached in the working group session<br>
then the current chairs will stay to ensure the continued stability of<br>
the working group.<br>
<br>
Those who volunteer to chair the RIPE Address Policy Working Group should<br>
be aware of the responsibilities and work this involves. A generic<br>
description of the responsibilities of a RIPE working group chair can be<br>
found in RIPE-542 (<a href="http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-542" target="_blank">http://www.ripe.net/ripe/docs/ripe-542</a>). Address policy<br>
working group chairs are also expected to coordinate with the RIPE NCC<br>
Registration Services department on issues and/or questions arising in the<br>
either the working group or the RIPE NCC regarding address policy.<br>
<br>
As working group chairs are usually determined by consensus during the working<br>
group session at a RIPE meeting we will also determine consensus on this<br>
procedure there. Therefore please provide your feedback before or at the next<br>
RIPE meeting: RIPE 69 in London.<br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
Gert & Sander<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></blockquote></body></html>