[db-wg] Database Working Group Chair Selection

Hi Randy

On Fri, 9 Jun 2023 at 20:42, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote:
>
> > That would be fine if we had a very active and engaging community. Like we
> > had 20 years ago. But the vast vast vast majority of this community is
> > silent on almost all database matters. The vocal people are a handful of
> > well known members of the community, whose views on many matters are also
> > quite well known.
> >
> > Sometimes someone raises a point and it gets little or no response. Like
> > assigning an allocation. Often the chairs know from face to face
> > discussions, people want this option. But there is no discussion. In
> > situations like this I've found that a chair needs to drive the discussion.
> > Even if that means making an outrageous suggestion that no one will agree
> > to, but it generates a reaction. From the following discussion we can move
> > forward.
> >
> > Also sometimes a chair needs to throw ideas out into the community to move
> > the service forwards. The chairs talk with the NCC engineers. We often
> > discuss ideas that no one in the community is thinking about. If the chairs
> > don't then raise it with the community the idea can never be considered.
> >
> > So either the chairs or the NCC engineers need to be able to put ideas into
> > the public domain, and sometimes drive the discussion to get it started, or
> > technically and socially the database as a product and service just
> > stagnates.
> >
> > I often take on this role, as well as the devil's advocate to question what
> > others say. I don't see it as pushing a personal agenda. I have no personal
> > agenda. It doesn't matter to me personally if the database evolves or dies.
> > It does matter to the industry and society. I have no employer or financial
> > interest in how the database evolves. I can look at each issue and consider
> > how it fits in with that old saying...for the good of the Internet.
> >
> > This is one of the reasons why I've put myself forward again as a chair for
> > another couple of years. I hope in that time David can spearhead a new
> > generation of WG chairs. Then dinosaurs like myself (and others) can ascend
> > into advisory positions instead of decision making roles.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Denis
>
> QED

Your argument has not been demonstrated Randy. David has the right
idea and I also like his goals. But it is not, as you stated, "simple"
to achieve this.

'facilitate working  group tasks'
'Promote active discussion'
'make the  content easier to follow'

How do you think this actually happens in practice Randy? What do the
chairs do if there is no discussion? What if there is no content to
summarise. Do we leave 'our agendas' at the door and 'simply' close
all the NWIs because no one has commented in the first/last two months
since the issue was raised? Life, society, this industry and yes, even
the DB-WG, have all evolved over the last 20 years.

We have archives of the mailing lists. Look back at all the NWIs since
NWI-1. How many of them never got off the ground, or were dying
inconclusively, until the chairs breathed some life back into the
discussion or started it? This is the reality of the 2020s. Most
people read but don't comment. To generate comments to get a range of
opinions from different people (more than cryptic one liners) often
needs someone to trigger a reaction from them. A chair needs to say
something, push an opinion or drive the discussion in some way in
order to get these other views and opinions so we can have a
consensus. Maybe some other WGs have more active discussions
naturally. That doesn't happen very often with the DB-WG.

Maybe we can adopt this idea of yours Randy, where all the chairs say
nothing, don't comment, don't intervene, don't offer any advice based
on knowledge and experience. Just sit back and moderate 'the
discussion', if there is any. This also means not going out into the
community or on the mailing list and trying to get people involved in
the DB-WG. That is driving an agenda that you say we should leave at
the door. It would be an easy life for the chairs. There would be very
few new NWIs and little discussion on those we do have. It may even
make my presentation at RIPE 86 on Managing the RIPE Database even
more significant as a way forward.

cheers
denis


>
> randy