[db-wg] WG Co-Chairs Tasks (was: Where are we with NWIs?)
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] WG Co-Chairs Tasks (was: Where are we with NWIs?)
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Authoritative check for domain objects seems to cache nameserver response
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sylvain Baya
abscoco at gmail.com
Fri Jul 21 21:03:49 CEST 2023
{no discredit, intent, inside!} Dear RIPE DB-WG, Denis, Comments below, inline, please... Thanks. Le vendredi 21 juillet 2023, denis walker <ripedenis at gmail.com> a écrit : > Hi Sylvain > > You seem to think there is some issue here of going against some consensus > or being disruptive. > Thanks for your reply, brother. ...you seem to have misunderstood, my point :-/ Look! as a Co-chairs, *i* think you should not say any thing like: <quote> I will now go back to my previous way of working where, as a co-chair, I do have an agenda - to get things done, for the good of the internet. Whether you consider that a 'personal' or 'professional' or 'DB' agenda is up to you. </quote> Why? simply because there is a better way to act; as Co-chair...at least, you would have verified if any rule, backed by the WG consensus, allows you to behave differently...and if not, then consult the WG, at worse, in order to *get your* consensus prior to any personal varying decision, beside of the agreed practices...but the best practice is to bind to your tasks. If you don't like such *inertia*; then remove your hat and contribute as you want. That's the actual long rough consensus, i think we behave upon. But, i may be wrong :-/ Hope my thought is clearer, now :-/ ...and that strong personal opinion, would change nothing on my perception of your, imho valuable, engagement within the whole RIPE's community. > > This is not the case. The simple fact > is, with so many topics on this mailing list, there is NO discussion. > If there is NO discussion there can be NO consensus. That is the basis > of this old fashioned, tried and tested, well documented, not to be > deviated from process...that often completely fails. I have always > made it clear that, even as a co-chair, I will express my own opinions > in order to drive discussion so that a consensus is possible. The > other chairs (previously the other chair) will determine consensus. In > many cases that is the only way to get anything done. If anyone has > any ideas how we can get the community involvement on many database > issues up to 5 or more people in a discussion (which would be an > amazing achievement) I would be very interested to hear your thoughts. > ...feel free to start here [1,2], brother ;-) __ [1]: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2023-July/007857.html> [2]: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/2023-July/007882.html> ...and if you still need more, after; then let me know. Shalom, --sb. > > cheers > denis > co-chair DB-WG > > > > On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 at 00:19, Sylvain Baya <abscoco at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > {change the topic. focus: basic tasks} > > [...] > > > -- Best Regards ! __ baya.sylvain[AT cmNOG DOT cm]|<https://cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure> Subscribe to Mailing List: <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/> __ #LASAINTEBIBLE|#Romains15:33«Que LE #DIEU de #Paix soit avec vous tous! #Amen!» #MaPrière est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement «Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire après TOI, ô DIEU!»(#Psaumes42:2) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/db-wg/attachments/20230721/ffef7442/attachment-0001.html>
- Previous message (by thread): [db-wg] WG Co-Chairs Tasks (was: Where are we with NWIs?)
- Next message (by thread): [db-wg] Authoritative check for domain objects seems to cache nameserver response
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ db-wg Archives ]