On 09/10/18 16:29, Peter Koch wrote:
On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:27:52PM +0100, Jim Reid wrote:
(1) The IoT WG will have 2 co-chairs who serve staggered 2-year terms. (2) A co-chair cannot serve more than 3 consecutive terms. (3) Each year, the longest serving co-chair will stand down and subject to (2) may make themselves available for re-appointment. (4) The incoming co-chair will be chosen by the WG using consensus and the remaining co-chair will make the consensus determination. (5) Any circumstances not covered by the above will be resolved by the RIPE Chair whose decision will be final.
I do not especially like it, because other WGs have demonstrated that a consensus process for personnel decisions easily degenerates. However, I can live with that.
For item (3) I think what is meant is that the alternate terms are maintained, not that the "longest serving co-chair" will have to repeatedly ask for reappointment. "The co-chair whose term is up" would sound better to my ears, at least.
I hate to say this but Peter does have a point. We all understand what you mean but one of these days a nit-picking bike shedder will come along and we'll have to fix it. Peter's suggestion is sound, I think. You can tell it's a quiet day. Nigel