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

Sat Dec 1 07:49:09 UTC 2018

>From what Andrew is saying - the policy should never have gone to last
call if there have been no changes. That's how the PDP process is meant
to work. In reality - if the whole community accepted seeing a policy
for the second time - then fair enough - but that is NOT the case here.
I strongly oppose this policy. I have also watched the antics of the
people pushing this policy and I think it was extremely rude and totally
out of place for one of their party to call someone else in the room a
"visitor" - suggesting that that other person had no rights to be
present. The person being subjected to this treatment provided much
needed input (and policies) to the Policy Development Process -
especially regarding IPv6 - which is our future.
We should have no place for Name Calling.

I never heard an apology either.

Anyway - I believe that the PDP Co-Chairs have made a mistake and this
Policy has not reached a positive Consensus (actually quite the opposite
to Positive). It should not be at last call.

The Policy - if used - is also extremely dangerous to the existence and
financial well being of the Company (AFRINIC).
It really should be withdrawn.

On 12/1/18 9:15 AM, Andrew Alston wrote:
>
> Sorry – I need to correct something in my email below –
>
>  
>
> I said there were no _/substantive/_ changes since the last rejection
> of this policy – this is inaccurate – there were **NO** - changes –
> substantive or otherwise – zero – zip – none – as per the website
> which publishes draft 6
>
>  
>
> Andrew
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From: *Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 09:27
> *To: *"aleruchichuku at yahoo.com" <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>, Daniel
> Yakmut <yakmutd at googlemail.com>, Daniel Yakmut via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy
>
>  
>
> Aleruchi,
>
>  
>
> While I agree with everything you have said – let us also be
> pragmatic.  This policy is pushed by the same crowd that walked to the
> microphone and agreed at the request of the community to drop another
> policy, and then reneged on it.  This policy has been rejected, as has
> the soft landing policy, over and over again – yet the authors do not
> give a damn about the will of the community or the good of the
> community.  Go and watch the videos of the Mauritian policy meeting –
> you will notice the same people involved in what happened there are
> involved in this policy as well.
>
>  
>
> The authors have clearly demonstrated that they care not a whit about
> what this community wants or believes is good for it, they have
> demonstrated bad faith, and shown that the only thing they care about
> is shoving something through no matter the consequence – and the
> co-chairs have already shown that they either do not understand the
> concept of consensus – or simply do not care.  Fact is – there is
> precedent on co-chairs being overturned on appeal in another RIR – and
> when it happened – the person who was overturned – ceased to be a
> co-chair.  These co-chairs however are insistent on a path that
> ignores the consensus process, and seem hell bent on forcing a
> situation where they are overturned – yet again – or failing that
> forcing AfriNIC into an untenable and potentially costly process
> beyond the appeal process.
>
>  
>
> Reality is – there were _/no/_ substantive changes to this policy from
> the last time it was rejected – and the objections to the policy that
> were stated back then have never been withdrawn, and by lack of
> changes in the text can be clearly demonstrated to not have been
> addressed – this flies in the very face of the definition of consensus
> – the co-chairs however simply do not care.
>
>  
>
> Welcome to what our PDP process has become – the bullying of the
> minority supported by co-chairs who do not understand consensus – to
> push through agendas that have zero to do with the good of the
> community and more to do with standing your ground to prove that you can.
>
>  
>
> And btw – before I’m attacked – yes – I have proposed some
> controversial policies over the years – fact is – all of them were
> withdrawn when the community wanted that.
>
>  
>
> Andrew
>
>  
>
> *From: *aleruchi chuku via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Reply-To: *"aleruchichuku at yahoo.com" <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 07:02
> *To: *Daniel Yakmut <yakmutd at googlemail.com>, Daniel Yakmut via RPD
> <rpd at afrinic.net>, rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy
>
>  
>
> It's very sad that this policy still lingers like a nightmare after it
> has been rejected over and over again. It has consistently bred anger
> and mistrust.
>
> Please for the sake of unity, I will advice the chairs to do what is
> right by the people. DROP THIS POLICY.
>
>  
>
> Cheers
>
> Aleruchi
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>
>  
>
>     On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 4:15 am, Daniel Yakmut via RPD
>
>     <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     RPD mailing list
>     RPD at afrinic.net <mailto: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

-- 
Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.128070590  Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20181201/f93f010a/attachment.html>