Dear Working Group

The random selection process was carried out yesterday after the EB meeting, using a hat loaned by Axel, overseen by the Ripe Chair, with actual drawing done by Salaam. A video is available for those of a mistrusting nature.

The three names drawn from the hat were

David Hilario
William Sylvester
Denis Walker

May I congratulate the three winners.

I will now stand down as co-chair of the WG. However if I may be permitted a few final remarks before leaving

I suggest that the three co chairs co-opt Piotr immediately as assistant to the co-chairs (if he is willing)
I suggest that the chair selection process is revised so that the term of the chairs is extended to three years and one stands down each year to prevent the sort of mass upheaval that have seen this time. Apart from that, make changes as you see fit.
I suggest that a suitable scribe be requested from the RIPE NCC to replace me. I've been doing it for getting on for 20 years and I've had enough :-)

I wish you all well for the future. I will continue to lurk so don't misbehave.

All the best

Nigel

Sent from my iPad

On 6 Dec 2016, at 20:08, Nigel Titley <nigel@titley.com> wrote:

> Dear WG
>
> It is now two weeks since we entered the review phase and we still have
> four candidates
>
> David Hilario
> Piotr Strzyżewski
> William Sylvester
> Denis Walker
>
> In my view nothing has been raised by any member of the WG that
> disqualifies any of these four from standing.
>
> Since we have four candidates for the three co-chair positions available
> I would like to take us to the next phase of the process which is to ask
> the four candidates if any of them would like to step down. In
> particular I would like them to consider whether they have:
>
> 1) The approval of their employer and/or the resources to attend the
> majority of RIPE meetings during their term of office.
>
> 2) The time and resource available to properly monitor the mailing list
> between RIPE meetings.
>
> 3) A sufficient knowledge of the RIPE Database to enable them to
> adequately understand and comment on proposals that the WG may make
>
> 4) The temperament to deal with members of the WG who may get very
> passionate about technical matters related to the DB, may not have
> English as their first language and may have different ideas on what
> constitutes reasonable debate.
>
> 5) An understanding of the Policy Development Process (although the WG
> has not developed policy for a long while, such knowledge is part of the
> equipment of any WG chair).
>
> Candidates have three days to consider these questions and either stand
> down or continue. If they wish to stand down they may either do so on
> the list or by direct email to me and I will relay it in a neutral
> fashion to the list.
>
> At the end of three days, if no candidate has taken a decision to stand
> down, I will invoke the random selection process. This is likely to take
> place during next week when the Board and RIPE Chair are available in
> Amsterdam and a suitable hat and witnesses may be procured.
>
> Best regards
>
> Nigel
>