There are two separate strands to Erik’s proposal so it’s best to split these into discrete threads.
> On 24 Nov 2017, at 23:15, Erik Bais <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear RIPE community members and RIPE Exec Board, > The RIPE community currently doesn’t have its own Governing entity .. we say, > we are the community .. but the community doesn’t have its own entity. > > What I would propose, is to setup a separate entity … with a small separate > board. No. Emphatically not. This is a remarkably bad idea. [1] RIPE is not incorporated anywhere and has no legal identity, just like the IETF. This is deliberate. It’s also very, very important. RIPE can’t be sued or enter into contracts or get taxed or have to file audited accounts. Creating a governing entity would destroy that. [2] It’s far from clear what this new body’s board would do (or how) or how they’d be appointed. Trying to clarify these issues will open up zillions of rat-holes and provide endless opportunities for shed-painting. These may well never get resolved. [3] It’s not clear at all what problem(s) this new body would solve. Or if those problem(s) are worth solving. Or how the new body would/could/should be better than what we already have. Which IMO is working just fine, is not broken and doesn’t need fixing. [4] Creating this new board will create unnecessary process bloat, new prospects for mission creep (budgets, general meetings, etc) and even more sclerotic decision making. Remember the golden rule of every bureacracy is to ensure its continued existence. The best (only?) way to stop that is not create the bureaucracy in the first place. [5] The community should simply just appoint the RIPE Chairman (and vice Chairman?) and trust them to get on with it. Our Dear Leader doesn’t need to be overseen by yet another committee => more bureaucracy => yet another baroque temple to procedures/process.
