[rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy

Sat Dec 1 03:15:49 UTC 2018

I witnessed one of the most crude way of pushing an agenda. The major reason why this policy is suffering and will continue to suffer any possible support is the fact  that the spirit and intent of the proposal in the first instance was suspect and targeted at some entities.

Clearly, the antagonism I observed does not allow for contribution to make the review policy any better. More so the policy is in bad faith and hence people are rejecting and wouldn't  contribute to it. However, I see and hear the authors insisting that we must contribute to it or "shut up". Therefore our shutting up is reject the policy for the poison it carries.

I am still of the strong opinion that we stick with what the RSA provides in regard to review. If the authors of the Review Policy are interested in review, they should direct their energy and skills at making the clauses in the RSA that  concerns review more effective.
I think that should be more important.

The last call for the Review Policy is what is call "Rail Rolling" and "Political Mugging". Therefore it will suffer unrolling opposition. Let us cut short the life of this policy and make progress. LAST CALL REMIANS REJECTED.

Until we stop seeing some members as "enemies", we will not make progress. There is a lot  of healing to be done let us get to work with that.

Cheers
Daniel

On Nov 30, 2018, at 8:47 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

> Sorry Caleb,
>  
> That’s not how the process works – the last call process exists to cover issues like this – and there are a multitude of times when policies have been overturned in last call.
>  
> Further to that – I do not believe that there was consensus in that room – and I do not believe that consensus by the definition has been reached – there are unaddressed and sustained objections – and the definition of consensus states that you cannot have consensus while there are objections that are sustained and unaddressed.  That does not mean that all issues have had to be resolved – it means that they have to be addressed – and there is no question in my mind that over the last few years – multiple objections have remained that the authors have chosen to patently ignore.
>  
> As such – I do not believe this policy should be in last call – but it is what it is – however – if people have further objections – they are free to raise them in last call – as I have just one with my previous email – and yes – if it passes beyond that – then it is through the appeal process we shall go – and failing that – well – there are other processes that may well come into play – the question is – is it in the best interests of the community to push it that far when so many sustained objections exist?  I question the wisdom of such a move.
>  
> Andrew
>  
>  
> From: Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele <muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>
> Date: Friday, 30 November 2018 at 22:36
> To: "dabu.sifiso at yandex.com" <dabu.sifiso at yandex.com>
> Cc: rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> Subject: Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy
>  
> Dear Dabu,
>  
> If I understand the contents of the policy, it says a review and not audit.
>  
> https://afrinic.net/internet-number-resources-review-by-afrinic-draft-4
>  
> You may choose to find the word audit in the link above.
>  
> Meanwhile, if we decide to use lexicons, you may decide to check differences in the words from the link below (although meant for accounting but still relevant in this context).
>  
> https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-audit-and-review.html
>  
> Whatever choice of words, it's best we respect and accept the rough consensus last call of the co-chair and move to appeal if we have issues with the policy.
>  
> Caleb Ogundele
>  
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 6:30 PM Dabu Sifiso <dabu.sifiso at yandex.com> wrote:
>>  
>> 
>>  
>> Has AFRINIC ever revoked resources as a consequence of a targeted audit at the moment?
>> Why were the resources being audited, what was the initial grounds to start the review?
>> How much resources did it recover?
>> On what grounds did they recover the space, what were the violations?
>>  
>>  
>> Does anyone have any link to the session where this was discussed now?
>> I read all the opposition emails, but I didn't see the session where the chairs declared consensus and no emails were sent by them yet to announce last call.
>> I would like to make my own mind on what happened in the room.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 30.11.2018, 09:58, "Eucharia Maryann" <eucharianene at gmail.com>:
>>> In my honest opinion I don't think that it is wise to consider a policy that will do us more harm than good, the review policy will put the end users and their business at risk and the end users are those we are suppose to protect their interest but now we are creating policy that will endanger their lives and business this is because the end users are not aware of the punishment and the troubles they will get into if an ISP violates the law or if an ISP is found wanting. Therefore, I am suggesting that we withdraw the last call that was made on that policy so that we will not end up creating problem instead of solving problem.
>>> ,
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RPD mailing list
>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> 
> 
>  
> --
> Ogundele Olumuyiwa Caleb
> muyiwacaleb at gmail.com
> 234 - 8077377378
> 234 - 07030777969
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20181201/de6157ac/attachment-0001.html>