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

[rpd] Report of the Soft Landing isuue

Alan Barrett alan.barrett at
Tue Apr 4 21:28:38 UTC 2017

> On 4 Apr 2017, at 15:59, Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at> wrote:
> You have touched a topic of interest: conflict.
> We have a case of a policy proposed by a member of the AfriNIC Board.
> The same board approves the policy for final use. You too have a case
> of members of the AfriNIC board expressing strong opinions on a policy
> when this same board sits at the top of the policy approval process.

Nothing in the AFRINIC policy development process prevents Board members from participating in the process.  The Board has no role in determining whether or not a proposal has rough consensus; that is done by the PDWG co-chairs.  The Board does have a role in ratifying policy proposals, but that occurs only after the community has reached rough consensus as determined by the PDWG co-chairs.  The Board’s role there is to check that the process was followed, and that there are no legal or other important barriers to implementation of the policy.

When/if the proposal gets to the point of ratification by the Board, any Board member with a conflict of interest would have to recuse themselves from voting.  However, it’s not clear what would constitute a conflict of interest.  I would suggest that a proposal author might have a conflict, but a commenter does not have a conflict.

> As silly as it sounds when some of these guys say they are acting in
> different capacities other than as Board members, there is a
> compelling need to address these glaring loopholes in the process to
> stop this absurd abuse of the process by the people supposed to
> protect and shelter it.

You seem to be accusing somebody of an abuse of the process.  Please state exactly who you are accusing, exactly what they have done, and exactly why you see that as an abuse of the process.

Alan Barrett

More information about the RPD mailing list