Malcolm
On 20/10/2017 11:11, Malcolm Hutty wrote:
I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that the NCC ought to be
bound to implement absolutely anything that comes out of the RIPE
community without limitation. You are rather tilting at a straw man of
your own creation here.
Well, whereas I have every faith in the good sense of the RIPE
community, I think we have to accept that the work of the Accountability
TF will have a wider audience. And straw men have an alarming habit of
coming to life when they come within the purview of lawyers, politicians
and the like.
However, when the taskforce asked NCC staff to look into this, they
discovered (to their own surprise) that the NCC has no formal document
of any nature that sets out a normative expectation that the RIPE NCC
will so much as take community policy into account. That seems a curious
omission.
I think this lies in the origins of both the RIPE NCC and the PDP. The
first existed before the second and the second came about while the
community still knew that the RIPE NCC would Do the Right Thing. In
these less honourable times, such a document, in whatever form it takes,
may well be necessary.
You are quite right to point out that the NCC has faithfully followed
the community's will, and while you and your fellow Board members remain
in charge, I am sure it will continue to do so. But part of the purpose
of this exercise is to help create the conditions that make it more
likely that your legacy in this respect is honoured by those that
succeed you. Nothing we do can guarantee that will happen, but writing
down that the NCC's history of implementing community policy is more
than a mere coincidence of opinion will both help guide future Boards
and give ammunition to Board members against anyone who argues that the
NCC should do otherwise.
I have no problem with this. We just have to be exceptionally careful to
guard against the principle of unintended consequences... something with
which the community is becoming more and more familiar in recent years.
Jim correctly pointed out that the community itself, not being an entity
with legal personality, cannot sign an MoU. That removes one option for
how such a normative statement might be recorded - but there are several
others. The NCC does, after all, have contracts with its members.
Personally, I think a better idea that I would like to see considered is
to write into the RIPE NCC's governing statutes that one of the purposes
of the NCC is to implement RIPE community policy. Of course this phrase
would have to be suitable qualified to avoid the pitfall you mention,
but I do not think that insurmountable, or even difficult: the NCC does
have lawyers, after all.
And I'm sure it is something that can and will be looked at. As you so
rightly point out, in these less than honourable times, it does seems a
curious omission.
Finally, may I gently suggest that the extremely defensive attitude of
some prominent community members to the work of this Taskforce is not a
good look. Most of us are reasonably long-standing members of the
community ourselves, and fully share both its values and well-proven way
of doing things. Our aim is to support this community, not to undermine it.
I would beware of reading more into emails than was intended by the
sender. Certainly in my case, I have the greatest respect for the work
that the Accountability task force is doing and very grateful to those
who have put in the time. You did however ask for comments and you
shouldn't be surprised to get them.
As William has said, nothing we come up with will simply go into effect:
we will simply publish some systematic observations and suggestions for
the community's consideration. Perhaps you might try to remain a little
more open to the possibility that our report might be worth the trouble
of reading, maybe even contain one or two useful ideas?
See the above... and may I gently suggest that you should also try to be
a little less defensive too. And please don't read more into that
comment than I intend. Imagine me with a big smile on my face.
Best regards
Nigel
