Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] [Community-Discuss] Larus foundation fellowship

Sander Steffann sander at
Wed Jul 3 16:20:08 UTC 2019

Hi Jordi,

> I think this should not be done by third parties, but authors and staff (see our previous email on this about a 1-2 pages PDF), not going into 2 and 3 above and making sure that is done 1 week before the meeting, so only *latest* proposals/versions are considered.

I accept, except s/authors and staff/wg chairs/. Afrinic staff is in a difficult position as their jobs and tasks can be influenced by policy proposals, so asking them to write a non-biased summary isn't fair. The working group chairs have explicitly chosen to represent the working group as a whole and to be neutral regarding proposals, so they are the most appropriate people to make summaries. It's what they do when determining consensus anyway, so it is already part of their tasks. Sharing that before a face-to-face meeting would be very helpful and will help focus the discussions there.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list