[ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Carlos Friacas
cfriacas at fccn.pt
Thu Nov 17 09:10:47 CET 2016
On Thu, 17 Nov 2016, Shane Kerr wrote: > Carlos, Hi, > At 2016-11-15 22:49:17 +0000 > Carlos Friacas <cfriacas at fccn.pt> wrote: > >> From the discussion at RIPE73 in Madrid, i also agree with the idea of >> having a Vice-Chair. > > Yes, I think having a vice-chair makes sense. Probably the role would > be something like: > > 1. Serve as Chair if the Chair is temporarily or permanently unable to > perform Chair duties. > > 2. Assist the Chair in any way that the Chair and Vice-Chair find > reasonable. 100% agree, with 1. and 2. >> When the Chair steps down, the Vice-Chair could automatically become Chair >> (if he/she accepts). When a new Vice-Chair appointment is needed, i would >> say the best recruiting base would be the WG Chairs group (currently more >> than 20 people, right?). > > So you think that the Chair selection process should actually be the > Vice-Chair selection process? I'm not sure about that. It seems like > being a Vice-Chair should be about helping the Chair, not just waiting > around for the Chair to retire. ;) Haven't thought about that angle... :-) "Forcing" any new Chair to serve as Vice-Chair will not only provide more insight, but might increase the community's confidence on a future Chair. Anyway, any Vice-Chair should be able to step down when he/she wishes, or if the Chair thinks the Vice-Chair needs to be replaced. I guess that "OR" should be an important feature ;-) > If we don't consider the Vice-Chair to be a "Chair in Waiting", > the we can just let the Chair pick. That seems like the best way to get > someone who can help out with a style that matches the Chair. I can agree with that. On the other hand, if a consensus between the Chair and the community can be found, even better... >> Either asking the WG Chair with more time on his/her record on that >> role/group to step up as Vice-Chair, or run an election process if two (or >> more) WG Chairs wish to become Vice-Chair on the same opportunity, sounds >> acceptable to me. >> >> We can also strenghten this by requiring that the new Vice-Chair is >> supported by *N* WG Chairs, despite its current time count as a WG Chair. >> >> I would also argue that former WG Chairs should be "eligible" -- >> especially if noone from the current set of WG Chairs wants to become >> Vice-Chair. And if time count becomes a criteria, all the time spent on >> the WG Chair role should be considered. > > I don't like having a requirement for the Vice-Chair (or Chair) to be a > current or former RIPE working group chair. Certainly being a working > group chair is valuable experience for the role, but I don't think a > necessary requirement. I don't have that experience, and as such, i appreciate the voluntary work/effort done by WG Chairs, from present and past. If no requirements are needed/set, in theory, even a newcomer could be (s)elec*ed as a new Chair -- and i don't really like that possibility :-) Cheers, Carlos > Cheers, > > -- > Shane >
- Previous message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
- Next message (by thread): [ripe-chair-discuss] RIPE Chair appointment procedure, some ideas
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]