[rpd] Appeal Committee Terms of Reference (Version 1)

[Owen DeLong]

> On Aug 2, 2017, at 11:59 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2 Aug 2017 9:20 p.m., "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> 
>> On Aug 2, 2017, at 07:53 , Noah <noah at neo.co.tz <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:
>> 
>> Dear Afrinic Board Chair,
>> 
>> I almost missed this and I have quickly gone through it and I want to thank you for your effort ref: this Appeal Committee Terms of Reference, however, I have some questions section 2.?
>> 
>> 
>> Seats 1 and 2: Two of the past chairs or past co-chairs of the AFRINIC policy development working group (PDWG).
>> 
>> +1 and in support of the selection of seat 1 and 2 as those make sense.
>> 
>> 
>> For Seats 3 and 4:   I wonder if other RIR's have provisions that require members from the AFRINIC region to seat in their appeal committees? 
> 
> Other RIRs have very different circumstances. As is often pointed out even when the circumstances in the AfriNIC region are not so different. However, in this case, they are quite different. No other RIR has such a degree of infighting nor such a large degree of mistrust among the factions around their policy proposals. Indeed, in the other regions, the factions on any given policy proposal are often quite different and you don’t find nearly identical groups clumping together in support or opposition of a proposal as you do in the AfriNIC region. Indeed, to the best of my knowledge, no other RIR has even such a review committee in the first place.
> 
> 
> That is your own opinion and as I wait the chairman of the board's response, I would like to point to you that the Afrinic numbering community has for years adopted so many policies.
> 
> That is enough reason to inform you thay this numbering community is experienced enough to deal with even conflicts that may arise out of the PDP process.

The factionalism in this community has been escalating for years and never before has it been at such a high degree as it is now. Indeed, the fact that this is the first time people have even noticed the lack of an appeals committee even though it was (theoretically) established by the PDP many years ago bolsters my point in this regard.

If an appeals committee is truly needed, then said committee must be truly independent and impartial in order to have credibility in their decision with both sides.

If the appeals committee is appointed entirely from within the region, unfortunately, any ruling they make will probably be regarded with mistrust and claims of unfair influence by the losing side.

> I don’t know the appeal process (if one exists) in RIPE, LACNIC, or APNIC, but in the ARIN region, the process is governed by what we call the petition process. If members of the community dislike a decision of the ARIN Advisory Council, they can petition that action on the mailing list. If enough other independent participants express support for the petition, 
> 
> Details are here: https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_petitions.html <https://www.arin.net/policy/pdp_petitions.html>
> 
> 
> The Arin approach is very rational as it takes a community approach via the mailing-lists.
> 
> We have seen such approaches also employed for years within our community ref:PDP and some policies have even failed to reach consensus nor get ratied by means of co-chair decisions. 

Sure, some policies prevail, some do not. This is the nature of any legislative process.

The ARIN process works well in the ARIN region and the petition process has rarely even been invoked. I will point out that NEVER has any ARIN petition ever resulted in a policy which failed to gain consensus through the normal process becoming policy by the petition process. In fact, no petition has ever ultimately resulted in a different outcome from the original decision.

However, in the AfriNIC region, I think this would be quite easily abused and could become a tyranny of the minority in that the threshold for petition in the ARIN region is quite low and the divided nature of the factions in AfriNIC would likely result in a constant series of escalating petitions with each faction prevailing in turns creating chaos in the actual policy process.

>> I fail to understand the rational around selecting 2 members from 2 different RIR's as if the AFRINIC community lacks people within our region who can fill up seats 3 and 4.
> 
> I believe the intent is to create a greater degree of independence from the internal politics inherent in the AfriNIC region and to increase the transparency and fairness of the process.
> 
> 
> Afrinic internal politics if they exist can be solved by the Afrinic community itself and this region is full of so many competent people from both the numbering and the names community that can independly seat on an Appeal committee and make rational decision.
> 
> That Independence can be sought from millions of competent members within our region.
> 
> Trust begins from within so to speak.

I would love to see this be true. However, I think that the complete lack of decorum and the outrageous conduct of a minority in the most recent election process shows that while there are a great many skilled and competent people in the region, there is also a vocal minority out to disrupt the processes to such an extent that extraordinary measures are necessary to preserve order.

> I think this is a legitimate approach in this case because, frankly, I think that members from different RIRs are more likely to examine the issue purely on the record and the merits of the arguments without regard for the factionalism and politics involved. These are issues that simply either don’t exist or are a much much smaller problem in the other RIRs.
> 
>> For Seat 5: A current or past chair or vice chair of the NRO NC/ASO AC, who is not from the AFRINIC region.
>> 
>> What is the rational behind this?  I mean the Afrinic board cant find, out of a continent with 1.2 billion people, one person from within the AFRINIC numbering or names community who can take up seat 5?.
> 
> Again, I believe that the intent here is similar to the intent with seats 3 and 4. I consider this an entirely reasonable approach to maintaining the independence of the appeals committee and applaud the board’s wisdom and foresight in this matter.
> 
> Since this are your own opinions, I will tell you that there is nothing reasonable or wise here.

And that is your opinion. I think it both reasonable and wise.

> How can we seek indepence outside of this region before we can even measure or test the effectivenes of own internal approach and independence within our own region.

I think you fail to understand the meaning of the word independence in this context if you can ask that question.

In order for the appeals committee to remain truly independent of the internal conflicts within the region, they must come from outside.

So far, no one has laid out an internal approach with independence. If you have a proposal to offer, let’s hear it… How do you make sure that members of the appeal committee appointed from within the region are truly independent of the factions involved in the proposal being appealed?

In the case of the ARIN region, there’s no appeals committee… Just an open process involving members of the community. I have documented above how I believe this process would come to be abused and be dysfunctional if applied to the AfriNIC region, so IMHO, that’s a non-starter. If you’ve got a better actual proposal, let’s hear it.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20170809/fa0a0819/attachment.html>