[rpd] Query on appeal

Thu Dec 6 06:51:32 UTC 2018

Dear all,
I really like this write up from Andrew,
Can this form the basis of our reconciliation process?

On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 6:20 PM Andrew Alston <
Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:

> See – Sadly I believe this broke down a long time ago.
>
>
>
> Go back and watch the video of the Mauritian meeting with another policy –
> where multiple appeals were made from multiple people at the floor asking
> for withdrawal – and it was consented to in my belief (though they now
> dispute that, despite that which is clearly on the video) and have pushed
> that ahead time and again – to the point where it was defeated by the
> appeal process as well.
>
>
>
> The definition of consensus is clear – in the face of an unaddressed
> sustained objection there can be no consensus – but there are those who
> believe this does not apply to them.
>
>
>
> We sit in a situation where there are those who stand at the microphone
> and openly and plainly advocate that the bylaws can be ignored.
>
> We sit in a situation where a co-chair comes to the list and instead of
> saying – I was granted 6 months by a vote of this community – my term has
> expired – attempts to justify and obscure.
>
> We sit in a situation where the members of this organisation requested a
> vote of no confidence in the board – and the board refused to table the
> motion.
>
> We sit in a situation where – when the board lost quorum for an AGMM –
> instead of turning to the community and saying – we have a major problem –
> help us fix it via an SGMM and a vote on the bylaws to fix the problem –
> chose instead to approach the courts.
>
> We sit in a situation where in Mauritius – with a multitude of bylaw
> changes were proposed to rectify various corporate governance issues –
> including a simple thing like stating that when a director leaves the
> board, he is obliged to renounce his legal membership of the company –
> could not get a vote to pass because some individuals believed that you
> don’t vote for something you yourself propose.
>
> We sit in a situation where those who once had such good intentions
> architecture a way to “stay relevant” for a period that is **at minimum**
> 18 years after they left the board.
>
>
>
> But – instead of us acknowledging things are fundamentally broken – and
> then working towards fixing them – we deny the problems – we hide our heads
> in the sand – and we employ “whataboutism” (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism) en mass.
>
>
>
> There can be no repair in this community until it is prepared to take a
> long hard look and acknowledge that there is something deeply wrong, and
> that things are deeply flawed.  For myself personally – and I admit this –
> I have gotten to the point where I no longer have faith that things will be
> repaired – and as I have stated in previous emails – I believe that the
> only time things will come right – is when an external party with more
> authority finally adjudicates.
>
>
>
> That being said – I cannot – and will not – be the man who stands on the
> boat knowing there is a giant hole in the bow and the water is flooding in
> – and at the risk of offending others – holds my tongue and says nothing.
>
>
>
> Even in writing this – I am fully cognisant of those who are going to
> employ more whataboutism to attack what I am saying here – but I’m actually
> ok with that – because it will simply prove what I have said time and again.
>
>
>
> It is a sad situation – but – in life – we deal with such all the time –
> and somehow – we continue – but can we really claim we have a community
> anymore? Or are we in fact a very divided group where no one group will
> give an inch and are pulling in opposite directions?  Where factionalism –
> and dare I say it – a strange form of policy tribalism now grips us.?
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* aleruchi chuku <aleruchichuku at yahoo.com>
> *Sent:* 05 December 2018 17:32
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>;
> pdwg-appeal at afrinic.net
> *Cc:* rpd List <rpd at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [rpd] Query on appeal
>
>
>
> Andrew + 1 in support of the appeal
>
>
>
> But I must say that it is sad that we got to this stage. Something is
> drastically not right somewhere. Every policy presented to the community
> must not move to the next stage until 80 -90% of concerns raised by the
> community is addressed.(afterall  It's the same community that will
> implement or be recipients of the policy)
>
>
>
> Rather we are saddled with a policy that is riddled with issues which the
> authors have bluntly refused to address and I can only wonder how and why
> it got to this stage.....this makes me feel that perhaps some people's
> opinion are more superior to others in the community....Then it is not a
> community anymore.
>
>
>
> Aleruchi
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2018 at 11:05 am, Andrew Alston
>
> <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>
> Hi PDWG Appeal Committee.
>
>
>
> I am seeking clarification – the appeal process says that any decision of
> the PDWG co-chairs may be appealed and puts a time frame on launching that
> appeal.
>
>
>
> I now need clarification – the decision to put a policy into last call –
> does the time from decision to put the policy into last call start from the
> moment of pronouncement in the meeting, or from the official announcement
> on the RPD mailing list.  That is to say – when is the decision considered
> taken – and this goes to a very key issue about the validity of decisions
> taken on the floor of a PDP meeting so the answer to this question is
> urgent – since if the time starts ticking from the moment the decision is
> taken – then time is short to launch the appeal against the decision – and
> a delay in answering the question by the PDWG Appeal committee cannot be an
> accepted reason to not accept a late appeal should this situation arise.
>
>
>
> The policy actually says – within 2 weeks from public knowledge of the
> decision – does a pronouncement on the floor constitute public knowledge in
> a streamed meeting?
>
>
>
> Secondly – I wish the PDWG Appeal committee to comment on what happens to
> a last call process if the decision to last call is under appeal pending
> adjudication.  I would assume that the last call process would be suspended
> and cannot proceed until the adjudication of the appeal has been completed,
> but I wish to have a formal clarification on this.
>
>
>
> And with this email – I am also formally announcing my intention to launch
> a formal appeal with relevant documentation against the decision to move
> this policy into last call – and I also am formally reserving my right to
> appeal against the decision to move the policy past the last call stage
> should that become necessary – irrespective of the appeal against the last
> call itself.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> Andrew Alston
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>

-- 
*Dr. Abdulkarim A.Oloyede*. *B. Eng (BUK), M.Sc (York), PhD (York), R.Eng,
A+*
*Senior Lecturer, **Department of Telecommunications Science, University of
Ilorin, Nigeria*
*Vice Chairman, Telecommunications  Development Advisory Group (TDAG),
**International
Telecommunication Union (ITU).*
*Alternative Emails: olouss at yahoo.com <olouss at yahoo.com>  OR
 aao500 at york.ac.uk <aao500 at york.ac.uk>*

-- 
Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng>, Weekly Bulletin 
<http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal 
<http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> PGPortal 
<https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20181206/0e225d6c/attachment-0001.html>