Hi Ole,
Good to hear from you again!
The RIPE NomCom process is described in ’The RIPE Chair Selection
Process’ (ripe-727) and ‘The RIPE Nominating Committee’
(ripe-728). ripe-728 is a close copy of RFC7437 which describes the IETF
NomCom process.
Both RFC7437 and ripe-728 have this to say:
“Any committee member may propose the addition of an advisor to
participate in some or all of the deliberations of the committee. The
addition must be approved by the committee according to its established
voting mechanism. Advisors participate as individuals.”
This is what I was referring to in my message.
Personally I see this provision as an opportunity for the NoCom to
closely involve people who make a commitment to help the NomCom to
function better. In particular the NomCom could decide to use this
mechanism to improve its diversity.
Of course I do not propose to invite everyone who claims to
‘represent’ a subset of the community that they claim is
‘excluded’. The NomCom is not a parliament! I just intended to point
out that this mechanism already exists and is available to the NomCom.
As NomCom chair I intend to point this out at the first meeting
referring to this and other pertinent discussions.
I hope this clarifies things.
Daniel
On 13 Dec 2019, at 18:59, Ole Jacobsen wrote:
Hi Daniel,
For the IETF nomcom, there are only 2 Advisors:
* Past chair
* IETF Tools Team Advisor
The Tools Team Advisor is mainly there to provide support for
the process (candidate feedback, encrypted committee deliberations
and so on).
The rest are Liaisons:
IAB Liaison
IESG Liaison
ISOC Board Liaison
IETF LLC Liaison
IETF Trust Liaison
I am not sure I understand how Advisors are selected in the RIPE
context: "An advisor is responsible for such duties as specified by
the invitation that resulted in the appointment."
Can you clarify what this means in practice.
Ole
