Hi All

On 21/11/2016 11:11, Job Snijders wrote:

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:21:57PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:16:33PM +0100, Horváth Ágoston János wrote:

While this is very insightful (thanks for sharing, Erik), I think we
are switching from professional to a personal level here.

If anywhere, in RIPE NCC, physical presence should not be viewed as a
number one priority. Even a 'company-sponsored' chair can be denied
travel by employer or have other business to take care of during the
meeting week. If physical presence is an issue, I propose we fix that
problem, not accept and then enforce limitations.

We might all wish otherwise, but "chairing a working group" is really
best done in presence...

Of course it will happen that a WG chair cannot attend - and this is 
why WGs have two or three co-chairs.  But this needs to be the exception.

So, a WG-chair-cancidate needs to be aware that this will busy him two
weeks a year, and that this comes with travelling - but I do not see an 
issue with this in the current candidate set.  They all are not naive 
newcomers but seasoned DB veterans that have attended enough meetings 
to understand what will be asked of them.

Job, why don't you just come straight out with it and say you personally have an issue with me and you don't want me to be one of the next co-chairs. Stop dancing around the issue and trying to make psuedo conditions aimed at disqualifying me.

I do have a problem with a chair who is only willing to travel to

Why are some people so fixated over this point? As Erik said it does cost a lot of money to go to a RIPE Meeting. If I don't 'need' to be their in person I can follow the whole meeting online. Just as so many of the thousands of smaller members have to do. Not all members can afford to fly around the world for weeks at a time to attend these meetings. As a chair I would need to be their in person and that would be my plan.

meetings if he is a chair, and habitually insulted and bullied RIPE NCC
staff without remorse.

My anger was directed at one person in particular, the one who sacked myself and many other great engineers based on lies. That person is no longer with the RIPE NCC now. As far as I am concerned that chapter is closed. And as Trump would say, what happened in the past should not disbar anyone from doing great things in the future.

Bullying is an interesting topic Job. I am glad you brought that up. It reminds me of someone who uses a position to publicly bully and harass other RIPE NCC members who prefer and choose to document their routing in the RIPE Database rather than in the AFRINIC Database. Not everyone, in either the RIPE or AFRINIC community, agrees with the AFRINIC homing project.

As a co-chair you have consistently and habitually refused to allow some topics to be discussed and blatantly ignored some issues that have been professionally raised. The evidence of this is well documented in the mailing list archives. This kind of action supports the established and wealthier members and deters the smaller and newer members from being actively involved in a discussion group that they do not see as very welcoming. You own review of the list of NWIs at the recent RIPE Meeting with an average of about 2 responses to each topic shows a spectacular failure to involve the greater community and drive forward any issue to completion. It is clear a new approach is needed.


We should also consider that a knowledgeable working group participant
does not equal being a great chair.

Someone who uses a position to push their own agenda and is unable to step back and take a neutral and impartial view and involve a wider range of the membership in decisions also does not equal being a great chair.

cheers
denis


Regards,

Job