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

[rpd] Report of the Soft Landing isuue

sm+afrinic at sm+afrinic at
Thu Apr 20 20:56:15 UTC 2017

Hi Owen,
At 11:24 20-04-2017, Owen DeLong wrote:
>I disagree.

I'll comment below.

>Let us examine the difference in roles here:
>The PDWG Cochairs are charged with determining whether or not the 
>policy has consensus of the community. An interest or attachment to 
>the policy (such as actually drafting it, having a commercial stake 
>in the outcome, etc.) is a clear conflict with that role.
>The Board ratification process does not focus on whether the policy 
>is supported by the community or whether or not it is a good policy. 
>The board is tasked not with any such value judgment, but with the 
>following very limited mandate:
>         +       Would ratification violate the board's fiduciary 
> responsibilities?
>                 (Would the policy be clearly financially or legally 
> ruinous to the organization)
>         +       Was the PDP followed in delivering the policy to the board?
>While I suppose you could argue that a board member with an interest 
>in the policy outcome might ignore his responsibilities in the first 
>question, the reality is that if the community has come to consensus 
>around such a policy, there are bigger problems than the COI involved here.

My comment was about avoiding a technicality.  The decision for a 
proposal to become a policy is taken by the Board.  It is easier for 
the director not to participate in the decision if he/she wrote the 
proposal instead of figuring out whether there is a strong case for 
conflict of interest.

S. Moonesamy 

More information about the RPD mailing list