Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] Comments about AFPUB-2010-GEN-005

Frank Habicht geier at
Fri Dec 24 09:51:40 UTC 2010


somehow I get the impression we should have less power for the chairs -
no ability for individuals to stall policy development.

And more power to the people...!  i mean: the mailing list.
Chairs should facilitate, but not decide, i believe.

.. of course one can imagine a mailing list being "lame" and not going
forward, then chairs can & should "invigorate" discussion towards
getting a "conclusion" ....

yes. thinking aloud.
(not replying to anyone here, just observing)

On 12/24/2010 12:28 PM, Mark Elkins wrote:
> Yes - but if the Chairs can not agree with each other (personality
> clashes excluded) - how ever can one say that there is Consensus?
> Technically - there should be very little opportunity for objectivity -
> so even two chairs should agree. The Chair should simply be a reflection
> of what the people agree to (consensus or not) - with the current
> "rules" (PDP Policy) being the guide towards making decisions.
> My thoughts anyway.
> You are correct about the reasons to have two chairs though -
> redundancy.
> Maybe if both Chairs are present - your idea of "power sharing" makes
> sense... but it should probably just be the Chair who's term is first to
> run out that is the Primary Chair. I'm assuming here that each Chair has
> a two year term - and they overlap by one year - so the primary Chair
> should be the person who has the shortest term left - technically the
> Chair with the most experience.
> If one one Chair is present at a meeting - that person is the defacto
> Chair.
> On Fri, 2010-12-24 at 00:41 -0800, Walubengo J wrote:
>> my earlier undestanding behind the need to have 2chairs for the PDP
>> was that they could act as "alternate" to avoid the occurence of "no
>> chair" present as it happened in Afrinic-11 in Senegal.
>> However, during the last policy meeting in SA (Afrinic-13), it occured
>> to me that BOTH Chairs are actually expected to be present and
>> managing the Policy discussion - thus creating a real potential for
>> deadlocks (as Dr. Paulos describes here).
>> One quick way to resolve the potential for deadlocks while
>> simultaneously eliminating the potential for "absent chair" is to
>> designate a "lead" Chair for each Policy meeting on a rotational
>> basis. Since we have 2 policy meetings per year, and 2 chairs, the
>> lead chair in a previous policy meeting becomes the secondary chair in
>> the subsequent meeting and both act as Backup for each other i.e. in
>> the event a lead chair cant make it for the meeting the secondary
>> chair simply takes over. Also this means that the lead chair for that
>> period/session has the final say - in the event of conflict or need to
>> break a tie (within the Chairmanship).
>> regards.
>> walu.
>>  On Thu, 12/23/10, Dr Paulos Nyirenda <paulos at> wrote:
>>         From: Dr Paulos Nyirenda <paulos at>
>>         Subject: Re: [AfriNIC-rpd] Comments about AFPUB-2010-GEN-005
>>         To: "Nii Narku Quaynor" <quaynor at>, rpd at
>>         Date: Thursday, December 23, 2010, 5:07 PM
>>         Experience on the AfriNIC PDP-MG shows that conflict among
>>         chairs of the PDP process has 
>>         occurred often in the last three years, making this a very
>>         meaningful and pertinent 
>>         issue. 
>>         This has been the case at face to face public policy meetings
>>         as well as during PDP-MG 
>>         internal meetings. It has been observed before that
>>         AFPUB-2010-GEN-005 has a major 
>>         problem in that it has two co-chairs (even number) which will
>>         result in many hanging 
>>         decisions very often. 
>>         One way to the resolve this is to revise AFPUB-2010-GEN-005 so
>>         that number of co-chairs 
>>         should have been odd.
>>         When analysing such conflicts, it will be necessary to include
>>         consideration of conflicts 
>>         of interest in policy development such as the case where one
>>         of the PDP co-chairs is an 
>>         author of a policy under consideration as it unfortunately
>>         happened in the development of 
>>         AFPUB-2010-GEN-005.
>>         Regards,
>>         Paulos
>>         ======================
>>         Dr Paulos B Nyirenda
>>         NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD
>>         On 15 Dec 2010 at 12:42, Nii Narku Quaynor wrote:
>>         > 
>>         > On Dec 15, 2010, at 2:12 AM, sm+afrinic at wrote:
>>         >
>>         > > AFPUB-2010-GEN-005 does not discuss about the question of
>>         conflict between the two
>>         > > Chairs.  I suggest that the Chairs ask the community for
>>         comments to get a better
>>         > > perspective of the problem.  The Chairs bear the
>>         responsibility to make the process 
>>         > > work and to ensure that their decisions have the consensus
>>         of the community.
>>         > 
>>         > 
>>         > normally, Chairs are looking for consensus so conflict would
>>         not be so meaningful
>>         > Nii_______________________________________________
>>         > rpd mailing list
>>         > rpd at
>>         >

More information about the RPD mailing list