I'm convinced that if you allow infinite terms, most of the people in the WG, will support the same existing folks. I did, now I realize it was a wrong decision in some case.
In Spanish we have a said "the bad known is better than the good to know" (not sure if the translation is correct, or there is an alternative in English) - and I followed that advice. I think it is wrong that the PDP has nothing to say with the selection of the chairs. The PDP is about policy making. They chairs are responsible of determining the consensus. No sense that it is not relevant. Responding to Sander/Nigel to make it a single email: 1) Basically, it is the same people speaking up about any policy proposal in any WG, of course many be not 100% coincidence, but a very high %. It would be a good analysis even if I'm mistaken, for the chairs-team to expose. It means there is no sense to discuss policy in different WGs, it means a small set of the community is interested. It means that people that may be interested in discussing people is lost because it forces them to participate in different WGs. There are many takes on this. 2) Some people may be willing to serve, of course they may prefer a specific WG, so then having 2 WG chairs instead of 3 will not help. But some others are willing to server in any WG (or a subset of them). 3) In all the RIRs "all" the policies are run by the community, no matter is the address policy or something else. I'm not sure if Sander was referring to ARIN. It is true that in that case, as it was commented a few weeks ago in the list, ARIN did a "gift" to the community accepting that the community runs the PDP and anyway, this is done via the AC, which is selected by membership ... I know I'm writing it in a very simple way, but basically is that. And this is a completely different model than the other 4 RIRs. In my personal opinion a broken model because the community lose the control of the proposals very early in the process. 4) People experience in a job is very good, but up to a certain point. Afterwards, they may be bored, pay less attention, and become "kings". This is happening. They are taking "usual practices" (from them) as rules of the PDP. Regards, Jordi @jordipalet El 10/2/21 16:01, "ripe-list en nombre de Gert Doering" <[email protected] en nombre de [email protected]> escribió: Hi, On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 03:57:44PM +0100, Jan Zorz - Go6 wrote: > As also Sander pointed out - there is a process in place for WG chairs > rotation and if a chair is not doing her/his job properly - the WG will > most probably make sure that the chair rotation happens ;) Also, it should be pointed out that the PDP has no authority on WG chair rotation or selection. Gert Doering -- creaky chair -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael Emmer Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.theipv6company.com The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
