Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Nomcom feedback to PDWG
owen at delong.com
Sun Jun 9 15:33:29 UTC 2019
> According to the rules, they can be candidates, no discussion on that.
> HOWEVER, the community has the *RIGHT TO KNOW* if they have been in the mailing list for several weeks, or years, if they have actually participated or not.
For anyone in the electorate that cares to research this, the RPD mailing list archives are open and can be searched.
> I don't think a student (just an example, I hope we don't have a case like that), that is new in the community, has not been active in an operator, and just joined the RPD mailing list, should be considered by the community, even if he has many friends.
I don’t think you get to decide what should or should not be considered by the community. While I somewhat agree with your statement in terms of how I would go about selecting a candidate to vote for, I don’t get to decide how others go about doing so.
Honestly, I think we would be hard pressed to find a student sufficiently motivated to take on the role who could do a worse job than the incumbent you appear to be supporting.
> So this is not about disadvantaging anyone, is about the COMMUNITY RIGHT to have all the relevant information.
Most of the information you are asking for is already public, so I’m not sure what your issue is here. It appears to me that you are asking the nominating committee to do your research for you. Any prior participation in the PDP is fully documented either in the mailing list archives or in the video recordings and transcripts of the RPDWG meetings.
> Do you expect to elect a politician just because he promise he will do a good job, even if he has no previous experience? Well may be ... What about a fireman? Let's suppose the community of a city has the right to elect one of the firemans. One of them has no experience, even more, he weights 150 kilograms. Do you think the community don't have the right to have that information?
As much as I wouldn’t favor doing so, I have to say that it certainly has happened in bigger elections than this. I’ve never heard of elected firemen, though certainly there has been more than one case where an elected chief of police or sheriff has come very close to your non-ideal candidate description above.
> I know they are extreme and hilarious examples, but I'm sure you understand better what I mean.
I think that you may publicly ask for any information you wish from the candidates and you may decide how to vote based on any criteria you wish to apply if you are an eligible voter.
I do not think that you should be attempting to dictate how others go about doing so or what information others should be asking for.
> El 9/6/19 0:19, "Daniel Yakmut" <yakmutd at googlemail.com <mailto:yakmutd at googlemail.com>> escribió:
> I want to believe that we have standing rules on who is qualify to be voted and how our elections should be conducted. I hope we not trying to define new rules here.
> We should stick to the rules and all candidates regardless should be given a level playing field. i don't subscribe to allowing anyone giving any special consideration.
> In particular I believe that all the candidates that are volunteering, could possibly some fresh air to the conduct of the PWDG. So let us not disadvantage anyone.
> So far NomCom have shown commitment to a fair process and maintaining that going forward will be important.
> On Jun 8, 2019, at 11:06 PM, Dewole Ajao <dewole at forum.org.ng> wrote:
>> Sorry, the election slot is missing from the draft agenda I shared earlier. It may be inefficient to have election at the start of the policy day so it is planned to hold towards the end of the day. Holding the election before the open mic will allow working group members also provide feedback on the process during the open mic.
>> The contents of https://www.afrinic.net/candidate-slate-for-pdwg-election-2019 remain unchanged from the pre-protest announcement. Perhaps we should wait for NomCom to tell the working group who the co-chair candidates are (before we start the questioning)? For future PDWG elections, the questions could be included as part of the information to provide during the nominations stage. Or maybe some have already been asked by NomCom and the candidates only need to decide what they wish to share with us.
>> One would imagine that the Elections Committee already has a plan for incorporating remote participants who will naturally expect to participate in the co-chair selection as allowed by the PDP.
>> On 6/8/2019 10:07 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>>> Hi Dewole, all,
>>> I will agree with your suggestion, it is very important to keep continuity of the existing co-chairs.
>>> Also, I think to avoid wasting precious time, it may be good to consider running the election at the end of the open mic, so even if the election process is delayed for whatever, reason, the PDP discussion time is respected.
>>> One of the elected co-chairs will be running for just one year, or how it will be handled in order to get the staggered terms?
>>> Finally, I've a question for the NomCom and the PDP-chair candidates. And I think this is very important for a successful knowledge by the community to whom they are electing. This is not about electing "your best friend for driving a party", but the people that better knows the PDP and has already been following it.
>>> So, I will like to know, for each of the candidates, since when they have been in the RPD mailing list, how they have contributed in the discussions in the list and meetings, or even with policy proposals. How the candidates are going to support the PDP, increase community participation, etc. Also, we need to understand if they have actively supported or non-supported any of the actual policy proposals, so we can avoid electing two chairs that may have a bias on the same policy proposal.
>>> Reading the actual CVs at https://www.afrinic.net/candidate-slate-for-pdwg-election-2019, I don't think all the candidates have that information right now.
>>> So, can the NomCom prepare a document answering (with verified responses to some extent) those questions for each of the candidate and publish it together with the CVs ?
>>> El 8/6/19 21:10, "Dewole Ajao" <dewole at forum.org.ng> escribió:
>>> A simple solution to clear any confusion would be for the Nomination
>>> Committee to send out a fresh announcement listing the final slate of
>>> candidates after their considerations have been done.
>>> Elections Committee should at this point also state how the seats would
>>> be filled so that everyone is clear about that. There have been
>>> suggestions on how to fill the positions; better to sort them out now
>>> rather than waste scarce time on the policy day.
>>> My suggestion (and I may be biased) is this:
>>> Since a current co-chair (Sami) is running, show of hands to see if the
>>> working group is in support of Sami retaining his seat. If majority in
>>> support of Sami continuing, then remainder of the election is for one
>>> seat going to whichever of the remaining candidates has the maximum votes.
>>> If the outcome of the first vote is not in favour of current co-chair
>>> taking a seat by default, then second round of voting can be for 2 seats
>>> possibly using the option of higher votes getting the longer term.
>>> Again, this is just my point of view.
>>> On 6/8/2019 5:25 PM, Ish Sookun wrote:
>>>> Hi Serge,
>>>> On 6/8/19 2:21 PM, Iyedi Goma wrote:
>>>>> The Nomination Committee reviewed the nomination of the persons who
>>>>> submitted their documentation. The Nomination Committee Chair contacted
>>>>> each nominee to notify him/her of the decision.
>>>> Is this particular update referring to all the nominees, nominees that
>>>> complained or only nominees that remained after the NomCom filter.
>>>> The text "persons who submitted their documentation" requires more
>>>> clarity IMHO.
>>>> Ish Sookun
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>> RPD mailing list
>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>> IPv4 is over
>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>>> The IPv6 Company
>>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com/>
> The IPv6 Company
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD