Re: [council] Possible roles for GNSO vice chair/s

[Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree that it makes sense to start with creating one vice-chair 
position and add more if the need arises down the road.
Robin



Ross Rader wrote:

> Philip Sheppard wrote:
>
> > In either case I'm happy to work with Chuck and Bruce in writing a 
> > short job description for
> > two vice chairs.
>
> Do we need two? I mean, the registrar constituency has the equivalent 
> of three, but we also have a larger number of face to face meetings 
> per year than council does, and also, a much, much larger number of 
> members - the logistical complexity is much, much higher.
> Might it make more sense to create one position and leave room for 
> more in the future as we come to understand our needs and capacity 
> more closely?
> Again, I agree with the additional structure, it can only help. But 
> I'd like to be deliberate and understand fully what the implications 
> of our plans our. I'm not sure that we've adequately considered 
> capacity and constraints to the point where "two " is indeed the magic 
> number.
> > This need not be linked to our timetable for electing the chair 
> > though if that's too great a
> > rush.
>
> Great idea. We should put some time bounds around completing this task 
> however. We have a habit of letting administrative design tasks hang 
> around much too long. It might be constructive to assign an arbitrary 
> drop dead date to ensure that we continue to move forward in a 
> constructive manner.
> -r