[rpd] new policy proposal: AFPUB-2019-GEN-003-DRAFT01: "Chairs Elections Process"

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Hi Pascal,

 

See below, in-line.

 

Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet

 

 

 

El 9/11/19 11:04, "Paschal Ochang" <pascosoft at gmail.com> escribió:

 

Hello Jordi,

Find below my comments. 

On Friday, November 8, 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <jordi.palet at consulintel.es> wrote:

Hi Pascal,

 

Thanks for your inputs, let me answer below, in-line.

 

Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet

 

 

 

El 8/11/19 4:32, "Paschal Ochang" <pascosoft at gmail.com> escribió:

 

Hello this is a great proposal but I have some concerns about some of the newly adopted procedures.
In section 3.3.1 I don't think it will be right for a chair who has held the position longest to vacate the position in a scenario where the cochairs originate from the same country in extreme scenarios. While we aim to select algorithms to minimize the possibility of a vacant seat at any point in time we should also try not to break the wheel of experience here. A longer serving cochair will be more conversant with the affairs of the PDWG in most cases so I think vacating his or her seat won't be ideal. 

 

 

· While I could agree here in your view, I think that there must be a balance in giving opportunity to new people. The text already gives the opportunity to the chairs to take a decision on that. Note also, that if the chair that has been longer time in the position hasn’t exceeded the two consecutive terms, he still can submit his candidacy for that election, so it is giving the voice to the community about that. On the other hand, we may have a longer time in the position chair that is not performing well (even if it has more experience) so the community has a way to not vote him again. It is a difficult balance. I will like to hear from you and others specific suggestions about this point.

·  

 That means the proposal is triggering an election for a sitting cochair who hasn't finished his term and therefore he has to stand in for elections again because of a cochair candidate originating from his country. Again this brings in an unnecessary electoral burden. It's as if the telling the sitting cochair "hey the candidate or elected cochair is from your country therefore even if you have done one year your sit is up for elections".

 

è    Do you think the last text I’ve sent removes that problem, or do you suggest an alternative one?

·  

 

Secondly while we aim to sanitize the motives for people contesting for cochair I don't think a little stipend for co-chairs will do any damage to the election process for me I think a per sitting allowance or stipend should be adopted if not already so.

 

· AFRINIC (I believe) support the chairs in their traveling expenses to the meeting and from time to time to other RIR meetings. Is not that sufficient? Otherwise, what you will suggest? Should we have that (even for traveling expenses) in the PDP?

·  

 

I will suggest we remove details of financial benefits from the proposal. However I can't say if AFRINIC gives a stipend or a sitting allowance per PPM which from my perception I feel they do.

 

è    It is a matter of transparency. May be the staff can provide their view here. Same for the rest of the community please!

·  

 

section 3.3.2 will disenfranchise voters. It's possible a deprived voter might not be active in the rpd but has been abreast with the happenings of the community. Therefore are we going to say we cannot allow that voter to cast his or her vote?. A deprived voter might be attending a PPM for the first time and will feel disenfranchised because I believe the presentation of the candidates is also an incentive to motivate or give voters an idea of their portfolio which I think is enough to orientate a newbie attendee if I may use that phrase . 

Without elaborating or handling some of this concerns I think this proposal cannot be accepted as it is.

 

· Note that I’m asking only for having been in the RPD list for 6 months. I’m not asking for demonstrating “activity”. I my opinion this will fulfil the case you’re indicating in your first case.

· Regarding a newcomer participating as voter, I’ve seen in many RIR meetings, including AFRINIC, a bunch (even hundreds) of local students, participating for the first time as guest. 99% of those participants will never participate again in AFRINIC, RPD, etc. Hundreds of them can vote for a specific candidate, without knowing at all nothing about the candidate or the PDP, for example, just because the candidate is local. Of course, in some cases that candidate can be a very valid one, however nothing ensures it and further this is a distortion of the process and very discriminatory towards the other candidates. For example, the other candidates can say “I’ve organized a remote hub so the people can participate in a remote meeting room” (and get there hundreds of people that possibly will support that candidacy). I think those newcomers can perfectly understand, if they are interested in a continued AFRINIC participation, shy those rules are done and this specific point will not, for that, feel uncomfortable or decide not to continue participating because that, in the other way around “next time I will be voting”. Is like when you need to have 18 years to vote. Reason for that is that you have some degree of “adult thinking, life experience, public policy understanding, etc.”; here we are saying your experience to be able to participate is having been there for a few months.

· Note that a participant in the meeting if really interested in AFRINIC, has been able to be in the RPD list much more time ahead the meeting, so nothing forbids him to actually participate.

· Last but not least, the way that electronic voting is organized is based on using the RPD list as the electoral census. NOBODY will vote “on-site”, the election is done BEFORE the meeting. 

 

Correct me if I am wrong I don't think the proposal explains the modus opererandi of the electronic voting process in detail. If I get you correctly voters can register on RPD and go to sleep and resurface during elections to vote. If I recall vividly candidates profiles are usually not published 6 months before the meeting therefore I feel someone eligible to vote can get to know about the elections and be interested at the period of announcement of elections and candidates or even during the meeting where elections take place. If voting is to be done before the meeting as stated, does that mean candidates can win an election in absentia just like in the case of a candidate  who was disqualified for not being able to give a presentation due to health grounds in Uganda so based on your analogy that means he would have been voted for BEFORE the meeting?

 

The proposal explains the goals of the electronic voting process. The details are to be implemented by an internal process to be developed by AFRINIC that match those goals.

 

What we are trying to avoid is people that has no knowledge or interest in the PDP, to vote a candidate because “he is from my country, is my friend, he asked me, etc.”. We want the candidates to be elected among those that have a minimum knowledge of the process and one basic sanity check for that, is to avoid the voting being done on-site. This also allows us to avoid wasting a lot of previous meeting time, which is needed for policy discussions. This also allow us to avoid that somebody register to the list once “my friend” just announced that he is a candidate, or even to register 100 of emails for ensuring my friend is elected. In general, I don’t think nobody will plan such “bad” action 6 months ahead …

 

If you’re following the RPD list, you’re a valid voter. We are asking that you don’t just registered, but at least have been in the list for 6 months.

 

Maybe you see the point much better now? Of course, I don’t think using all that text as policy text is needed.

 

·  

· As said, happy to heard inputs on those specific points (and in general in all the proposal, of course!):


On Wednesday, November 6, 2019, Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:

Hello.

The text of the proposal is well written and I believe brings value to the election process with control mechanisms to ensure neutrality and balance of the chosen persons.
One important point I highlight is that staff when implementing this make sure a trustable electronic system is used to ensure one vote by participant and to avoid fraud. I guess something about that will be contained in the impact analysis that will come.

Fernando

On 05/11/2019 11:04, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
Hi all,
 
As with the previous ones, I'm attaching our proposal PDF, already submitted, so the community can start commenting in case the publication by AFRINIC is delayed.
 
Thanks in advance for any inputs!
 
Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 
 
 
 
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
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
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
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.



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20191110/d52cef7f/attachment-0001.html>