On 19/02/2018 16:51, Nigel Titley wrote: I vote for option 3. -Hank
At the last Executive board meeting I took an action to start a discussion on the RIPE-list about the notion of remuneration for the RIPE Chair.
We were fortunate that Rob B had an employer who didn't mind him devoting unlimited amounts of time to the RIPE community. Now that Rob is no longer with us we need to decide whether we wish to restrict the occupant of the RIPE Chair to being someone who works for such an employer or whether we wish for the community to financially support the occupant of the role.
If we decide that we *do* wish them to be supported then the question arises of where this support is to come from. The RIPE Community does not exist as such; it has no financial resources so this question may touch on how we wish the community to evolve.
I'm going to throw some ideas into the pool. I don't necessarily support any of these, but offer them as a starting point for discussion.
1. We legally constitute the RIPE community, enabling it to hold financial resources and raise income.
2. We restrict the RIPE chairmanship to those who can afford to support themselves (RIPE NCC would continue to pay expenses)
3. The RIPE NCC pays a salary to the RIPE Chair
All of these possibilities have pros and cons, which you can probably work out for yourselves.
I invite anyone with an opinion to join the debate. Try to keep your contributions concise and to the point. Try and remain courteous.
If you have connected your ripe-list email contact to a trouble-ticket machine then I will call down my curses on your children and your children's children unto the seventh generation. Don't risk it...
All the best
Nigel Titley Chairman RIPE NCC Executive Board