On 17/05/17 19:19, Job Snijders wrote:
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 07:09:53PM +0100, Nigel Titley wrote:
On 17/05/17 16:49, Job Snijders wrote:
If we as community can manage to put together an Executive Board, a team of Arbiters, and a Program Committee, surely we can manage to figure out how and who should appointed a RIPE chair.
I would respectfully remind you that the EB is elected by the RIPE NCC members and the Arbiters are appointed by the General meeting. Neither are actually put together by "The Community" (tm).
Do you believe that "The Community [tm]" and "RIPE NCC members" are significantly disjoint groups of stakeholders? Are they so far disjoint in their instantiation, history, and operations; that analogies are inappropiate?
Analogies are fine, and there is, I agree, significant overlap between the members of the two communities but there are extremely significant differences: the main one of which is that the RIPE NCC membership is precisely defined but the RIPE Community is not. Nigel