[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Update to Resources review policy proposal

[sergekbk]

Hello Dewole,
Thanks for this comment.
The limit of 24 months applies to a member based on ressources  portfolio.  If  the portfolio  changes with new allocation,   member can be audited  anytime on the new ressources if required.Is this clear enough or shall we make  it explicit  ?

Kind Regards.
Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Dewole Ajao <dewole at tinitop.com> Date: 11/15/2016  11:38  (GMT+01:00) To: Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com>, "rpd >> AfriNIC Resource Policy" <rpd at afrinic.net>, General Discussions of AFRINIC <community-discuss at afrinic.net> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Update to Resources review policy proposal 

    Thanks for working to apply the community's input to your
      proposal, Arnaud. 

    
    To test the proposed re-wording, consider the following sequence
      of events:

    
    Member XYZ initiates self-requested review;

      Review is completed by AFRINIC in X weeks;

      After review, Member XYZ applies for "large chunk" of number
      resources;

      Member XYZ receives "large chunk" of number resources in say 60
      days;

      Member XYZ happens to make some unacceptable use of (previous or
      new) number resources and it somehow becomes known to the
      community;

      Regardless of convincing evidence, Member XYZ cannot be subjected
      to a review until 24 months have elapsed since the last review.

    
    Is this a design feature or a bug?

    
    Regards,
    Dewole.
    

    
    On 15/11/2016 10:48, Arnaud AMELINA
      wrote:

    
    
      
        Hi community !

          Following, recent discussions and in accordance with text
          proposal from Owen and others contributors, authors propose
          this as replacement to the section 3.3.3
        -'---old version---''
        3.3.3 Reported: Here, members are reviewed either
          because:
        a. They have requested the review themselves or

          b. There has been a community complaint made against them that
          warrants investigation. 
        ----new version-----
        3.3.3 Reported: Here, members are reviewed either
          because:
        a..They have requested the review themselves or

          b. There has been a community complaint made against them that
          warrants investigation. Complaints shall be backed by evidence
          and AFRINIC  staff  shall evaluate the facts as appropriate to
          conduct the review. However this review is not applicable to a
          member  on which a full review has been completed in the
          preceding 24 months.
        Regards.
        Arnaud. 

        
      
      

      
      

      _______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

    
    

  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20161115/2124fbc6/attachment-0001.html>