Thank you for this email on ncc-announce and from what I've read in the minutes of the EB, this has become quite a controversial topic within the EB already..

This shows in the minutes where it states : ( https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-executive-board-meeting <https://www.ripe.net/about-us/executive-board/minutes/2023/minutes-165th-executive-board-meeting> point 7.3 )

7.3 EB candidates assessment
During EB#163, the Board asked the Managing Director to investigate mechanisms for the assessment of Executive Board candidates before an election.
Remco van Mook left the meeting room during the discussion of this item. He requested that it be noted in the minutes that it was inappropriate for the Board to discuss this topic.

I can only guess on the actual reason for Remco to leave the room as this was brought to the table ..

Thanks for bringing it up… saw it in the 165 EB minutes but didn’t connect the dots right away.

Could you express why the board decided to continue to discus the topic with an incomplete board, where putting this on the agenda was clearly upsetting one of the board members ?
Was this because of the actual content of the proposal brought to the table by the MD (as he was tasked by preparing the topic as requested )

It seems that we need a way to seek comment on the board meetings such as this.

I also saw “therefore the Board agreed to discuss such requirements and restrictions with the members at a BoF or an Open House session. “ — the Open House is tomorrow;

do we need a BoF to discuss restrictions on board candidates?

My own inquiry is the pecularities of setting up an entity in the UAE (which was going on since 2022) - perhaps a membership can use more detail on the what, why, and how? At GM maybe?

There was also a talk on possible suspension of candidates, in the same meeting, 7.2:

"the Board asked the Managing Director to investigate whether it is possible to amend the Articles of Association in order to allow the Board to temporarily suspend board members until a final decision is made by the GM.” - the legal answer is, only GM can.

May I ask why the board considered to implement a process to remove its own members? I can imagine the harm if conspiring group of its members does it.

[…]
From what I see in the email that you send today, the proposal is looking to exclude WG Chairs (active members of the RIPE community) to not run for the EB... While these are some of the most active members of the community.
Another suggestion from what I see is to limit the amount of people from the same country.. We've had Falk & CK (German) in the Board, Job, Remco & Raymond ( Dutch ), although Raymond has been living in Finland for years.
Or are we talking about where they are residing .. in that case Salam (former EB member and running candidate) is residing in The Netherlands, so is Job & Remco ...

Personally I would find it discriminating, if a good candidate would be disqualified, just by its country of origin, because someone in the EB happens to be already from the same country. (by birth or where he/she resides. )

Good point - and i can imagine in case of such restriction being implemented, a board member from a certain country can make impossible two candidates of same country to win elections.

How can one solve a tie in such case?

Also removing the pool of WG Chairs is something I would be strongly against ... A lot of current / former board members have been WG Chairs ..
They have the faith of the community, they know the community and that is why they get elected for the EB position ...

Agreed here as well.