I’ll take your third question first, because it’s the easiest. From RIPE-692 section 2:

So, without amending RIPE-692, no, next time we will not have four or five. 

Speaking personally now, and not as the non-nominated chair calling consensus:

As for the first two subquestions, I know that day job stuff has gotten in the way of my attention to the working group from time to time during the pandemic (indeed, this led in part to my own decision to step down), so appointing three will at least increase available chair attention, which in turn would tend to make the group more informative (through e.g. more active solicitation of the program, as well as a wider network to draw on). 

As for productivity, I’ve always seen the purpose of the MAT WG as putting measurement-related information, whether measurements, tools, or techniques, relevant to the Internet operations community (specifically in the RIPE region, though we’ve never rejected a talk for lack of specific regional focus IIRC), in front of an audience that would not have otherwise seen it, and to use that information as the basis of conversations that build the community. The second part of this mission, driving new conversations, has admittedly been very difficult to achieve without in-person meetings, and hopefully we’ll do better at it in Berlin and beyond. 

Will selecting three chairs be more productive by this measure? I tend to think so, for the same reason it’ll make the group more informative.

Back to the non-nominated chair calling consensus hat:

Given the reality of timezones and the fact that this comment came in close to under the wire Tuesday AOE, let’s extend the discussion period to tomorrow.

Cheers,

Brian