Dear Collegues, feedback regarding this topic was sparse and in favor of keeping the mailing-list based procedure the express support that was used before RIPE-88. Therefore we can consider this to be consensus in the WG an proceed accordingly with the WG-Co-Chair selection process for RIP-90. Thanks and best regards, Peter
Am 24.03.2025 um 13:35 schrieb Peter Steinhäuser <ps@embedd.com>:
Dear colleagues,
the term of my valued Co-Chair, Peter Wehrle, ends with RIPE-90.
With the changes to the Co-Chair selection process introduced for RIPE-88 we did receive well founded criticism around the procedure of the adjustment of the selection process, specifically that we did not sufficiently seek consensus on the WG mailing list.
For the upcoming RIPE meeting's Co-Chair selection process, we would like to initiate a discussion about the selection process that should lead to consensus within the WG.
The WG's statutes describe the process in general but not in detail (https://www.ripe.net/community/wg/active-wg/iot/internet-of-things-wg-chair-...)
Before RIPE-88 the following procedure was used:
1) Several weeks before the respective RIPE meeting the WG's remaining Co-Chair sends out a call for candidates to the WG mailing list. 2) Candidates start a new e-mail thread on the mailing list with i.e. "[name] for co-chair" and their application 3) WG members express their support by responding to the e-mail 4) The candidate who gains most supporters is selected as the new WG Co-chair
In the light of what happened during the Co-Chair selection of the Open Source WG at RIPE-87 in Rome we did discuss something like that could be avoided. Therefore, a changed process was used for RIPE-88:
1) <same as above> 2) Candidates send their applications to the remaining WG Co-Chair 3) Several days before the RIPE meeting the remaining Co-Chair sends a list of the candidates and their applications to the mailing list 4) During the WG session at the RIPE-meeting attendees can express their support using Meetecho.
This process was announced on the mailing list but may not have been discussed appropriately. We would like to address the comments received on the mailing list and at RIPE-88 to find proper consensus in the WG.
As mentioned above the major reason to introduce a change was that in the event mentioned it occurred that in a very short timeframe many persons who never were active in that WG before subscribed to the mailing list and expressed support for one specific candidate. Using Meetecho for RIPE-Meeting attendees (online & offline) was an attempt to address this - but of course may exclude WG members to express their support.
We're looking forward for your feedback and would like to find consensus on the procedure during the next days.
Best regards, Peter