Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Cooperation re PDP update proposal
amelnaud at gmail.com
Sat May 25 14:57:21 UTC 2019
Le mer. 22 mai 2019 à 13:50, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <
jordi.palet at consulintel.es> a écrit :
> Hi Komi, all,
> Many got lost and confused easily in the unmoderated flow of mails.
> Big disagreement here. A PDP, by definition is an open and NOT MODERATED
> PROCESS AT ALL. It must be dynamic, and if some people don't participate,
> is not good, but that should not preclude the moderation of those that
> actually participate.
Can we be more serious in these discussions about the PDP with less
contradictions and inconsistencies?
What argument are you really making with the statement above?
PDP is not an IGF, but an open, transparent decision making forum with a
The AFRINIC PDP uses a Working Group as it is expected to study,
discuss, design and implement through policies, solutions for a proper
management of the INRs in the service region.
And such working group requires appropriate moderation.
Moderation of a working group mailing list must be understood as defined
in BCP25, section 6.1
Moderate the WG email list
The Chair should attempt to ensure that the discussions on the list are
relevant and that they converge to consensus agreements. The Chair should
make sure that discussions on the list are summarized and that the outcome
is well documented (to avoid repetition). ...........
> Please, realize that if I send an email to a given policy authors in
> November, it should not be needed that I resend the email 6 months after to
> get responses. If you volunteer to author a proposal, you commit to advance
> it according to the community discussion and respond timely to emails. This
> is not necessarily true for community participants, they can decide NOT to
> respond to authors emails.
> Of course, but both things are compatible. I usually don't expect that a
> 1st version of a policy proposal is right, but if you don't keep improving
> it along new version, it will not happen.
> > Please, lead this process to conclusion.
> > Thank you.
> > On behalf of PDP-BIS Authors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD