[Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - PDP review?
seun.ojedeji at gmail.com
Tue Oct 25 19:34:17 UTC 2016
Hello Badru, Kindly find inline:
Sent from my LG G4
Kindly excuse brevity and typos
On 25 Oct 2016 08:59, "Badru Ntege" <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com> wrote:
> Hi Omo
> You raise very pertinent issues. I might want to add that we should also
look into the capabilities of the candidates. Historically we tend to vote
for any willing candidate but as you well note bellow ability to
objectively perform the role and manage the process is also needed.
SO: You raise a point above that I cannot help but comment upon, as you
seem to imply that is what Omo meant by his mail as well. I do not believe
that the community votes for just any willing candidate, while willingness
to serve is indeed a +1 for a candidate, the community does elect/select
those who they believe have the ability to serve in such capacity.
If there are people within the community who are willing to serve in that
role, they should also make themselves available when the call is made and
it's up to the community to determine if they have the "ability to
objectively perform". Perhaps I should also note that there are clearly
stated process to follow if anyone believes that a/the Co-Chair(s) has not
acted and adhered to the principal of the PDWG stated in section 4 of the
PDP or any other part of the PDP.
Let me be very emphatic about this; the sustainability/success of the
AFRINIC PDWG is dependent on the community and NOT just the Co-Chairs alone
so I encourage us to make the work of the Co-Chairs easier by discussing
issues constructively both on the floor, and on the mailing list.
One of the former Co-Chair said, maybe we should change the sitting
arrangement of the PPM as most of the time, we talk "at" the folks seated
on the high-table and not "talking to one another". ;-)
Again speaking on my personal behalf (and as a former Co-Chair).
> On 10/25/16, 10:05 AM, "Omo Oaiya" <Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net> wrote:
>> Dear Community,
>> I am not suggesting there is a problem with the PDP per se or
criticising the co-chairs, past or present, but recent discussions on
accountability and co-authoring a policy proposal has resulted in my taking
a closer look at the PDP and its requirements.
>> The current PDP (
adopted in 2010 specified improvements from its predecessor.
>> It lists fixing the following issues amongst others as incentive:
>> the case of PDP moderators inability to attend public policy meetings
>> the lack of appeal mechanisms against moderators actions
>> issues fixed on mailing list being reopened at face to face meetings
weakening the decision making process.
>> consensus building process leading to scenario where opinions expressed
at face to face have more weight that the ones expressed on mailing list
>> While the new PDP succeeded in addressing #1 and #2, it has not
addressed #3 and #4
>> The current PDP introduced the PDWG with co-chairs to perform the
"administrative functions” of the group.
>> - It did not describe what these administrative functions were.
>> - It did not prescribe criteria for co-chairs selection or an election
>> - It also did not describe the process for determining “rough
>> As a result, we have seen:
>> - co-chairs candidates who could be more familiar with PDP and Internet
Number Resource management.
>> - insufficient moderation of policy proposal discussions on the mailing
list and at face to face meetings leading to endless repetitive discussions
>> - inability of co-chairs to determine consensus encouraging abuse of the
process with some people persistently opposing proposals and stalling
progress with insubstantial arguments causing unnecessary delay and
>> The policy discussions at AFRINIC-24 is a perfect illustration. Another
easy example is that since AFRINIC-24, there has been little discussion on
proposals which were sent back on mailing list for further discussions as
per meeting minutes (
and no action from the working group co-chairs.
>> **Some questions for the community and co-chairs**
>> - How do we fix issues #3 and #4?
>> - Will the proposals returned to the list be presented in AFRINIC-25? if
yes, what will be the discussion points be and for which expected outcomes?
>> _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss
mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
> Community-Discuss mailing list
> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Community-Discuss