Hi, On Wed, 16 Nov 2016, Jim Reid wrote: (...)
When we talk of "election" before deciding that this is the way to go, it unfairly biases the discussion in that direction. It creates a mindset/environment which excludes other possibilities or discourages people from suggesting them.
Making it a "not-so-appropriate-word" to use during a discussion, may also create some bias :-)) Again, i didn't say an electi*n is an absolute need, nor did i say that it was my preference. Please note i only mentioned it as a possibility if two (or more) people *with* a proven track record within the community (and that to me is being a WG Chair, but probably not exclusively...) step up. (...)
IMO, the enthusiasts for electing the RIPE Chair need to first solve the eligibility criteria. This is a difficult, perhaps impossible, problem to solve in a forum like RIPE which is completely open and has no membership.
Everyone (in theory) has a voice. If there are no voices against... I also don't think that we absolutely need to close any eligibility criteria at a 1st try. :-) Cheers, Carlos