Hi, Jim
On 28/05/2020, 06:58, "Jim Reid" <jim@rfc1035.com> wrote:
On 27 May 2020, at 16:21, Andy Davidson <andy@nosignal.org> wrote: If governance is improved by seeing the Community and NCC separation in the work of our committees then let's have that improvement for THIS selection. We can ensure this quickly (without even delaying the chair appointment) by altering the constitution of those committees today Altering the constitution (composition?) of the Nomcom -- which is presumably one of “those committees” -- means changing RFC728. That will be a very slow and painful exercise.
Yes, composition. And it does not mean improving RIPE-728 instantly, just some concrete actions by members which solve this conflict of interest at play whilst the work continues.
Suppose none of the other Nomcom members are prepared to serve as its Chairman if Daniel is thought to be no longer acceptable in that role. What then?
I think better of the people on the Nom-com than to assume they would do that. I think better of Daniel than a supposition that he would want or encourage them to do that.
What if some of the Nomcom quit in disgust because of these shenanigans? Are these risks worth it?
We can all play the what if game - what if people are turned off by participating in our community because we are seen to do nothing when there is a governance problem? In the past, the RIPE Community Chair and the chair of a RIPE Committee/Task Force/Working Group could have had a conversation about a problem regarding RIPE community oversight to an NCC person or function or service. Right now, they can't because the RIPE Chair and the Chair of this Committee *work for the NCC*, and one reports to the other. Do you not see how this is a governance problem, however accidentally derived? Yes or no? Andy