May 2017 - ripe-chair-discuss

List comments and working together as a community
by Nick Hilliard 02 Aug '18

02 Aug '18

Some days, the Internet does not shine. Today, as a result of things said on this mailing list, three people felt that they needed to vacate the discussion. This is not something to be proud of and it is something which benefits no-one. To the people who said things which were identified as being unhelpful (and this applies to everyone on this mailing list) can we please remember that this is a community trying to discuss things on a mailing list, and that email is probably one of the worst communications mechanisms ever devised. Things that are written are often not taken in the spirit in which they were intended; although no-one said anything which was intended to be malicious or hurtful, the tone in many emails today was unhelpful and in some cases inappropriate. We can do better than this as a community and I think we owe it to the community at large to do better. To the people who felt they needed to withdraw from this discussion: please reconsider. You have each made many valuable contributions to the RIPE community in the past and it would be a loss for everyone if you could not contribute to this discussion. Nick

2 2

Status of RIPE Chair discussion?
by Shane Kerr 06 Jun '17

06 Jun '17

All, Another RIPE meeting has come and gone, but I don't remember any discussion about the missing RIPE Chair stuff - either the job description or appointment procedure. Honestly I'm not sure what to do. While there does not seem to be a lot of enthusiasm for this work, it seems like the kind of thing that should move forward before it is needed. Perhaps we just need to wait for the accountability task force to remind us that we don't have these things? Or do we need to declare the RIPE Chair list a task force so that Daniel will insist that we have a deadline? ;) Cheers, -- Shane

23 73

RIPE Mailing List Code of Conduct
by Hans Petter Holen 23 May '17

23 May '17

The RIPE community’s strength comes from its breadth of experience, diversity of views, and an open, respectful exchange of ideas. These are values that we want all of our community members to uphold. Please treat each other with tolerance and respect. Free speech and an open exchange of ideas is encouraged and celebrated. Demeaning, intimidating or harming other community members is wrong. We are especially sensitive to behaviour that offends based on gender, sexual orientation, religion, race or ethnic origin, or other perceived social, cultural, or personal differences. RIPE community members should not spam mailing lists, post others' personal information, register multiple accounts to avoid moderation or mislead participants, impersonate others, or make threats. Overt marketing or promotional activities are discouraged. Chairs are responsible for facilitating and moderating the RIPE community's discussions. At times they may direct an individual to cease a certain type of behaviour. Chairs have the authority to moderate or ban disruptive community members if they decide this is necessary. If you believe that someone is behaving contrary to this code of conduct, please inform the relevant Chair or the RIPE Chair. -- Sincerely, Hans Petter Holen - hph(a)oslo.net - +47 45066054

4 3

Re: [ripe-chair-discuss] Status of RIPE Chair discussion?
by Job Snijders 18 May '17

18 May '17

On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 01:23:03PM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > On 18.05.17 13:19 , Job Snijders wrote: > > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 01:08:23PM +0200, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > >> Otherwise I think we have positive movement and maybe even rough > >> consensus??????? > > > > Sure, if you ignore the people that stated that "selected as needed" is > > not acceptable. > > I referred to Rob Evans' proposal: "The RIPE Chairperson is appointed > by his/her predecessor, but serves the RIPE community." Perhaps I am missing something glaring obvious, but you are suggesting there may be concensus on rob's proposal, which arrived 45 minutes ago in my mailbox, and to which I have seen only 1 reply (namely yours)? On topic: the methodology of a chair appointing the next chair does not look sound to me. It reeks of dynasty and may introduce loss of peripheral vision. Kind regards, Job

2 1