Nurani, Just to get the premises right: you keep claiming that a Spanish wall between RIPE and the RIPE NCC is either codified in or processes or our practice. As Gert pointed out the former is not the case. I have pointed out anecdotal evidence that the latter is not a tradition either. So claiming that this ‘sits at the heart of our community values’ appears far fetched to me. About whether such a Spanish wall is desirable our opinions obviously differ. And I recognise that you are not alone. So I suggest that you organise to get such a Spanish wall codified in our processes and we will have that discussion. You have said ‘And to be absolutely clear from my side as well, this is in no way a comment on any of the volunteers, staff members or candidates involved.’ Can I take this to mean that we can carry on with the running process? Or do I detect a desire to influence the running process? If the latter is true then the NomCom will need concrete suggestions with significant support. As far as the running process is concerned the NomCom has meticulously adhered to ripe-727/728. So far we have heard a lot of positive input about the nominees. The NomCom has already talked about conflicts of interest and dependencies in principle. We have not discussed particular nominees yet. I am sure that the NomCom will consider these aspects carefully once we discuss candidate selection; and that includes appearances too. Daniel (speaking for himself and himself only)