[AfriNIC-rpd] RE: Last call for comments for Policy Development Process

[McTim]

Hi Vincent,

On 10/4/07, Vincent Ngundi <vincent at kenic.or.ke> wrote:
> Hi McTim,
>
<snip>
> (a) IMHO, this would fall under "amendments to new PDP". Seems you might
> have to propose something to that effect, a policy proposal (amendment?) for
> that matter.

Maybe, but perhaps it will only take an interpretation from those who
wrote the original PDP.

>
> (b) The last-call is meant to incorporate recommendation/comments made
> during the f2f meeting.
>
> (c) The current PDP says:
>
> <snip>
>
> "4. If there is consensus at the open policy meeting

Yes, and my reading of this interprets it to mean "if there is
consensus on the original proposal then go to step 5".

As I mentioned below if changes are made, then the full list should
have the opportunity to discuss it.  In other words, a modified
proposal is a new proposal IMO.

I am concerned only about the IGF folk looking at our way of doing
things, and being critical.  We need to be seen as having the bottom
up model that works.  Having only 15 days to voice opinions/objections
to amendments only AFTER a policy has "reached consensus" doesn't seem
to have enough deliberation time built in.  The PDP is silent on what
happens if there is overwhelming numbers of objections to the
amendments, except to say:

"A period of 15 days will be given for the community to suggest any
final changes and amendments."

Who decides if changes or amendments are added to the final policy?
Is it the list? How is consensus on this determined?

I'd like that spelled out at least.   How about:

"7. A 15-day last call for comments on the policy will be announced on
the policy mailing list. During this 15-day period, comments agreed
upon during the open public policy meeting will be incorporated into
the policy by the author, if the majority of the MG finds that
consensus has been reached on the amendments by the list during last
call.

Instead of;

7. A 15-day last call for comments on the policy will be announced on
the policy mailing list. During this 15-day period, comments agreed
upon during the open public policy meeting will be incorporated into
the policy.

AND

Since the 30 days/60 requirements were changed inDurban, i ssume that
the NOTE will now read like this:

Note: The policy should be ratified by the BoT at the subsequent Board
Meeting.

I'd like it to be made clear what "ratify" means, so I offer the change:

"Note: The policy should be ratified by the BoT at the subsequent
Board Meeting.  Ratification means that the Board has read the MG
summaries and recommendation, and validates that the PDP process has
been followed, at which point the ratified proposal becomes AfriNIC
community policy.  The Board does/does not have the authority to not
approve a policy that they may think unwise or not agree with.

I have left "does/does not" in the above sentence, as IIUC, they do
not (in other regions), but I would like to spell out more clearly
what "ratification" means, so obviously, we will have to choose either
"does" or "does not".

What do you think?  Is:

16.4. To be responsible for the facilitation and implementation of the
resolutions passed at members' meetings, and to take all such steps as
are necessary for this;

from http://www.afrinic.net/corporate/bylaws.htm#16

sufficient in this regard?

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim