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

Sat Dec 1 12:03:21 UTC 2018

On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, 11:57 AM Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com
wrote:

> Timothy, I became aware of it when I asked for the documentation.
>
>
>
> I am well aware that I was a board member – I am also well aware that I
> had zero responsibility to the board of directors to inform them of
> anything once my term expired.  What I did and did not inform the board of
> during my term – I am not allowed to comment on because of the NDA that I
> signed – that I have repeatedly said I will not violate.  More than happy
> to release any communication with the board on any matter if the board is
> prepared to give me a waiver from the NDA on all matters – in which case I
> will happily answer this – and oh so many other questions.
>
This is even more serious than I imagined (if true) and just like any
member of the community, I can make some basic assumptions. But still
waiting for the clarification from the concerned staff.

>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> *From: *Timothy Ola Akinfenwa <akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 13:46
> *To: *Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc: *Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>, rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy
>
>
>
> Andrew,
>
> Comments in-line
>
>
>
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, 11:34 AM Andrew Alston <
> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com wrote:
>
> Further comment inline:
>
>
>
> *I disagree with this. Just as you clarified that the previous issue did
> not likely happened under the current CEO, we may likely say the same for
> the staff too. A staff can not be blamed for a flawed procedure that is
> meant to have been corrected by the Organisation as a whole. Let's 'assume'
> the current staff has no idea about what you mentioned and the previous
> staff did not provide any documentation of such in the handing over notes,
> then trust me you can't blame the new staff in its entirety. *
>
>
>
> The staff were well aware of this corruption long before this staff review
> happened – I raised the issue of the corruption of the data with them
> during 2017.  If however, let us assume that they were NOT aware of this
> data corruption – that would indicate an even bigger problem – that data is
> being held with no knowledge of its corruption until it is raised by a
> member…. I don’t think I would even want to consider the implications of
> that.
>
> Thinking about this now, I'm curious to know how long you have known about
> the data corruption before raising it in 2017 and if you took any steps
> further to inform the Board because I consider this very serious, not
> forgetting you were once a Board member yourself.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Timothy Ola Akinfenwa <akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 11:51
> *To: *Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc: *Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>, rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy
>
>
>
> Andrew,
>
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, 9:40 AM Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com
> wrote:
>
> Timothy,
>
>
>
> AfriNIC HAS **NEVER* *publicly acknowledged the loss of a large portion
> of attachments associated with application documents.  How is it that when
> we talk about audit and staff assessment – that it does not come to light
> to the community that Afrinic does not even have a large amount of
> documentation associated with the applications that would demonstrate how
> they were applied for?
>
> This will be serious if true. I think the AFRINIC CEO should provide
> clarification to this. I will not like to be misled. Just in case this
> claim is true, has it been remedied? When too?
>
>
>
> This documentation I still maintain is critical for a fair audit that
> covers all aspects – and if you do not have said documentation for ALL
> members – to act on it against SOME members would be prejudicial.
>
> I agree with you on this, only if the above is confirmed to be correct.
>
>
>
> So to refer to staff assessment – how was THIS not brought up in staff
> assessment – and does this not put paid to the lie that the staff
> assessment in and of itself is flawed?
>
> This has to be clarified too, just only if and only if your previous
> assertion was true!
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Timothy Ola Akinfenwa <akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 11:23
> *To: *Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za>
> *Cc: *rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] Opposing the last call made on the review policy
>
>
>
> Hello Mark,
>
> See responses in-line
>
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018, 8:52 AM Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za wrote:
>
> 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.
>
> Not speaking for the person here, but I remembered watching it remotely
> where the said person clarified his statement.
>
> I never heard an apology either.
>
> I think you should watch again, the person apologised if his statement has
> been misinterpreted and even heard applause from the room afterwards.
>
> 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.
>
> I thought Staff Assessment was conducted. I believe this must have been
> sorted out and necessary clarification provided.
>
> 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>
> <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 09:27
> *To: *"aleruchichuku at yahoo.com" <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>
> <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com> <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>, Daniel Yakmut
> <yakmutd at googlemail.com> <yakmutd at googlemail.com>, Daniel Yakmut via RPD
> <rpd at afrinic.net> <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> <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Reply-To: *"aleruchichuku at yahoo.com" <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>
> <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com> <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, 1 December 2018 at 07:02
> *To: *Daniel Yakmut <yakmutd at googlemail.com> <yakmutd at googlemail.com>,
> Daniel Yakmut via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> <rpd at afrinic.net>, rpd List
> <rpd at afrinic.net> <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> <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> --
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rp
> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>d
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20181201/05a4f2ff/attachment-0001.html>