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

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

McTim dogwallah at
Fri Dec 24 11:20:23 UTC 2010

I agree with frank, pdp-wg chairs should not have "power" to make
decisions, but instead should facilitate and call consensus according
to established criteria. This is the reason i was opposed to a pdp-mg,
but accept that a pdp-wg is a more lightweight "filter" between the
Community and Board.  our next step seems to be to establish criteria
for the pdp-wg members to use to determine consensus. Happy holidays,
McTim...who is too busy to write more, as he is chasing monkeys away
from his lunch on the beach

On 12/24/10, Frank Habicht <geier at> wrote:
> Hi,
> 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" ....
> Frank
> 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
>>>         >
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at

Sent from my mobile device


"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

More information about the RPD mailing list