Re: [ripe-list] cull

Sent from my iPad On 25 Oct 2016, at 13:07, Randy Bush wrote: > < rant > > >> Ripe NCC wages a continuous war against this sort of thing. > > that's nice. but when it happens to me, were do i send the error? You could try the Contact us form on the website, for a start.

Re: [ripe-list] cull

On 25/10/2016 13:51, Randy Bush wrote: We live in a complicated world, with complicated rules. The same is no doubt true of midwifery, garbage collection and embroidery. We can only do our best. but the tl;dr is that we should not expect newer folk to always be playing at top level. Something

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE 75 - DTCM Requirements

On 05/07/17 09:41, Randy Bush wrote: > then i am utterly confused what all the noise is about. > > let's get serious here. to me, the critical question is availability of > decent coffee. did the site survey cover this? Trust Randy to get to the heart of the matter... can we move on? Nigel

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force: Updated Draft Scope and Presentation at RIPE 74

On 08/05/2017 11:02, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: Proposal 1 Ideally a task force charter states a rather narrowly defined task and also lists expected results, such as specific documents. In order to avoid spending more time and energy arguing over this I suggest, as a compromise, to add

Re: [ripe-list] Announcing Diversity Task Force draft charter, plus activities at RIPE 75

Shane I think the draft charter pretty well covers everything. I'd like to express my thanks to the TF for their work so far. On a side note, although the gender balance in the TF as a whole is good, it is interesting to note considerable imbalance in the two sub-communities. Does the TF have

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75

On 19/10/17 09:24, Jim Reid wrote: > >> On 18 Oct 2017, at 23:53, William Sylvester >> wrote: > >> 2. There is no explicit obligation anywhere that the RIPE NCC will adhere to >> policies developed by the RIPE community. Strictly speaking, the RIPE NCC is >>

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75

On 19/10/2017 10:27, Carsten Schiefner wrote: Hi Nigel, On 19.10.2017 10:36, Nigel Titley wrote: The NCC Board does of course take account of policies, and also comments on them as part of the evaluation process that the NCC does during policy development. In all cases up until now we have

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75

d you are absolutely right, those of us who've been around a long time sometimes need to take a step back and examine the way we've "always done things" just to make sure we're still doing it right. On 2017-10-19 12:17:43 CET, Nigel Titley wrote: Did i get right, that "RI

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE 75

e official statements of the RIPE NCC Executive Board? No they are statements made by me, wearing my Chairman hat. I'm happy to take off the hat and make the statements as Nigel Titley, Internet person at large, if it makes you happier. What Jim and I were both trying to say, and obviously som

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE Accountability Task Force Update at RIPE, 75

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

[ripe-list] Discussion on financial support for RIPE Chair

machine then I will call down my curses on your children and your children's children unto the seventh generation. Don't risk it... All the best Nigel Titley Chairman RIPE NCC Executive Board

Re: [ripe-list] RIPE NCC Community Projects Fund 2017 Recipients

On 27/12/17 10:39, Jim Reid wrote: > >> On 22 Dec 2017, at 15:39, Alistair Strachan wrote: >> >> The RIPE NCC Community Projects Fund Selection Committee has reviewed the >> applications and is happy to announce that the following seven projects have >> be awarded

Re: [ripe-list] rob

On 01/12/2018 17:09, Randy Bush wrote: > it's been three years > Indeed it has... still missed.

Re: [ripe-list] https://www.ripe.net/ inappropriate javascript

On 03/05/2019 00:31, Randy Bush wrote: >>> I would prefer to not have any third-party tracking scripts on >>> ripe.net. >> +1. The NCC should not be entertaining any form of spyware. Ever. >> I’m astounded that it’s even necessary to state such a fundamental >> truth. If we’ve reached the

Re: [ripe-list] https://www.ripe.net/ inappropriate javascript

On 03/05/2019 13:05, Randy Bush wrote: >>> i am curious what technical and management decision processes which >>> allowed this to happen. something broke. >> >> I'm inclined to think that this is accidental... cockup rather than >> conspiracy. > > i did not mean in any way to imply

Re: [ripe-list] https://www.ripe.net/ inappropriate javascript

On 03/05/2019 15:50, Nigel Titley wrote: > > > On 03/05/2019 13:05, Randy Bush wrote: >>>> i am curious what technical and management decision processes which >>>> allowed this to happen. something broke. >>> >>> I'm inclined to

Re: [ripe-list] Call for consensus RIPE Chair & Vice Chair selection by Nominating Committee

On 04/07/2019 11:17, Hans Petter Holen wrote: > > It is time for me to call for consensus on > > The Chair Selection Process > https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-chair-discuss/2019-May/000262.html > > The RIPE Nominating Committee >

Re: [ripe-list] NomCom Disbanded - No More Blog

On 27/05/2021 08:47, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: Again, do we really need to keep this blog publicly accessible? I still have the data *of the blog only* because of the promise I made in the community plenary at RIPE 81. I would feel much better if I could delete this too. I would say to

Re: [ripe-list] excuses for my response to provocations in the list yesterday

On 10/02/2021 12:27, Carlos Friaças via ripe-list wrote: > 2 or 3 terms, plus a "freeze period" (1 term? 1 year?) to avoid cases > where a chair "jumps" to another WG. I would completely support this if there weren't already problems in getting enough people to take on the extra workload of

Re: [ripe-list] excuses for my response to provocations in the list yesterday

On 10/02/2021 13:13, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via ripe-list wrote: > Hi Nigel, > > I've the feeling that in part, the lack of volunteers is due to the fact that > existing ones can continue in perpetuity. Well, possibly, but most of the WGs I've had anything to do with are quite assiduous in

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

On 31/01/2022 21:15, Gert Doering wrote: Hi, On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 08:58:22PM +0100, Hans Petter Holen wrote: I will not comment on your email right now, now but I will, however, point you to the RIPE Code of Conduct. https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-766

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

Hank On 01/02/2022 06:56, Hank Nussbacher wrote: I too agree with Denis and Gert but there is no need to accept blame. Denis is not accusing anyone.  If anything, we are all to blame for not being as diligent as Denis.    Denis has even suggested a way forward: "it will benefit the RIPE NCC

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

On 01/02/2022 10:49, Gert Doering wrote: Hi Nigel, On Tue, Feb 01, 2022 at 10:31:15AM +, Nigel Titley wrote: I call on everyone, myself included, to calm down, have a cup of tea, and let Hans-Petter get on with the job of getting his legal team to verify (or not) what Denis has said

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

On 01/02/2022 12:40, Jim Reid wrote: On 31 Jan 2022, at 21:15, Gert Doering wrote: I find the use of the Code of Conduct as a tool to suppress criticism *on documents* very much inappropriate. This is not making *me* feel "safe and included". +gazillions Hans Petter’s comments were

Re: [ripe-list] LIR and Member Agreements

Dear Athina On 01/02/2022 13:26, Athina Fragkouli wrote: We appreciate this input on our legal documents. I would like to assure you that the points raised will be evaluated by legal experts. This type of feedback is always appreciated and we will give it our full attention. However, I would

Re: [ripe-list] Draft Document: RIPE Task Forces - Definition and Guidelines - v3

On 23/03/2022 14:38, Niall O'Reilly wrote: Dear Colleagues, [Please view this message as either plain text or HTML, according to your preference.] In view of significant comments received during what we had expected to be a restricted last call, Mirjam and I have decided to make a fresh

Re: [ripe-list] Nominations solicited: 2023 Rob Blokzijl Award

On 22/08/2023 18:03, Carsten Schiefner wrote: Hi Michele - On 22.08.2023 18:17, Michele Neylon - Blacknight wrote: So it wasn’t awarded between 2018 and 2022? no. I'm not on the foundation's board - but Corona and even just a small award ceremony didn't go well together, me thinks.

Re: [ripe-list] DRAFT: Principles for Remuneration of the RIPE Chairs

Joe On 15/03/2023 12:38, Joe Abley wrote: Making the amount of funding clear and known before people are asked to throw their hats in the ring makes it more likely that people will feel comfortable accepting nominations. I think this actually addressed in the document by making it clear

Re: [ripe-list] DRAFT: Principles for Remuneration of the RIPE Chairs

On 07/03/2023 16:40, Niall O'Reilly wrote: Dear friends, After much unexpected delay, I am at last ready to ask you to read and comment on this DRAFT statement of principles for remuneration of the RIPE Chairs, which follows from a recommendation of the RIPE 2020 Nominating Committee. As

Re: [ripe-list] DRAFT: Principles for Remuneration of the RIPE Chairs

Ladies and gentlemen On 14/03/2023 15:14, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: Kurtis,colleagues, this is indeedone of the scenarios where the remuneration arrangementwouldnot work.We should not put a specific way to deal with situations like this in the document because we cannot foresee the details

Re: [ripe-list] DRAFT: Principles for Remuneration of the RIPE Chairs

On 15/03/2023 10:08, Joao Luis Silva Damas wrote: On 14 Mar 2023, at 17:59, Nigel Titley via ripe-list wrote: Having said that, it may well be that continuing to accept that the RIPE NCC continues to employ the RIPE Chair(s) is the only workable solution. Would it be any better

Re: [ripe-list] Re-opened Last Call for Draft Document: RIPE NCC Staff Participation in the RIPE Community

On 28/07/2023 13:14, Carsten Schiefner wrote: On 28.07.2023 10:38, Daniel Karrenberg via ripe-list wrote: [...] As a community we have much to gain and little to loose by welcoming RIPE NCC staff to participate fully and -of course- transparently in the work we do. On the other hand we

Re: [ripe-list] Re-opened Last Call for Draft Document: RIPE NCC Staff Participation in the RIPE Community

On 21/07/2023 16:32, Niall O'Reilly wrote: Dear colleagues, On 14 Jul 2023, at 13:29, I wrote: Unless there is strong feedback from others in the community not to bother, I will work with the other authors to revise the draft accordingly. After that, Mirjam or I will announce a fresh

Re: [ripe-list] New Draft Document: RIPE NCC Staff Participation in the RIPE Community (Please review)

https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-documents/other-documents/ripe-ncc-staff-participation-in-the-ripe-community Please review this document. If you have any comments, questions, suggestions, please send them to this list or to me directly before 31 May 2023. Whilst I'm happy with the

Re: [ripe-list] ripe-list Digest, Vol 139, Issue 9

On 11/05/2023 12:12, denis walker wrote: Hi guys People who work for a national lottery company are also citizens and residents of the country. But they are usually not allowed to buy lottery tickets. Pro footballers are also football supporters. But they cannot gamble on the outcome of a

Re: [ripe-list] ripe-list Digest, Vol 139, Issue 9

On 11/05/2023 14:51, Joe Abley wrote: Following on from my previous comment, I think it would be better to focus on avoiding *actual* conflicts of interest. I think worrying about appearances is what happens when there is a lack of understanding of the substance and, in the case of managing