The "Cooperation WG Chair Selection Process” is here: https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/coop/cooperation-wg-chair-selection... I would like this to be followed. Does anybody object? In particular I note that "the Chair/s declare a decision, based on mailing list discussion, as they would do for a policy proposal.” This implies that “Chair/s” ought not to insist on their own preferences and to ignore the WG. I do not think that is what Meredith has in mind. But I am still seeking clarity. However, based on his contributions on the mailing list, I would like Julf to be a co-chair. I think a co-chair should be active, present. Gordon
On 11 Jul 2016, at 20:54, Meredith Whittaker <meredithrachel@google.com> wrote:
We would not be going back to a fait accompli. We would be making a decision following a month and some weeks deliberation on the list.
However, the mode by which a decision gets made, process or no, is not clear or determined. As co-chair, I expressed my preferences as they relate to people I will be working and collaborating with. My preferences have not changed. That's what I'm able to do. I am not able to divine the "will of the group," nor is there a process drafted to do so.
I appreciate your continued participation and your drive toward clarity, Gordon.
Thanks, Meredith