[rpd] On the newcomers requirements to vote.

[Paschal Ochang]

Hi all,
I humbly request that this arguments and contributions be moved to the
original subject or thread which is about the cochair election proposal.
This subject about newcomers requirements to vote is misleading and
deviated from the original proposal proposed by Jordi therefore providing
and unhealthy environment without encompassing the whole proposal in total.

It can even be seen that the original generator of this subject has not
backed up his initial post with any new arguments.

Therefore IMHO I will suggest we go back to the original subject and look
at the proposal as a whole which will enable us move forward.

On Monday, November 11, 2019, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
wrote:


> Hi Daniel, all,

>

>

>

> I think we’re missing the point.

>

>

>

> We are proposing an electronic voting NOT on-site. It is done *

> *previously** to the meeting.

>

>

>

> At the meeting, there is just a “formal ratification”, but the elections

> have already concluded many weeks before.

>

>

>

> Only in the extreme case that 1-2 days **before** the policy meeting the

> staff realized that we don’t have co-chairs (because illness, visa issues,

> or whatever, as Caleb suggested), then an alternative and exceptional

> process is organized and, in that case, I think is fine that the board or

> any of the committees take care of it.

>

>

>

> Everybody is able to participate in the meeting, everybody is able to

> participate in elections (if they have been in the list for some time), and

> we all save precious time for policy discussion, instead of wasting part of

> it in something that can be done on-line and improvising procedures and

> solutions and discussing about all the possible approaches as it happened

> last times.

>

>

>

> So, nobody is denied to participate in such election’s activity, because *

> *ISN’T** anymore done in the meeting.

>

>

>

> So, in that sense, nobody is a newcomer at the meeting time, from the

> perspective of the PDWG. Somebody participating for the first time in the

> PDWG will be able to register in the list (if not done already), and of

> course, participate in next elections, as both, candidate and voter.

>

>

>

> It’s hard to believe, for me, that anyone is opposing, specially in the

> Internet environment, to move to electronic means, saving time (voting,

> counting, solving issues, deciding about an alternative process, voting

> again, counting again, etc.), making the process much more efficient and

> avoiding paper ballots.

>

>

>

> Regards,

>

> Jordi

>

> @jordipalet

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> El 11/11/19 10:16, "Daniel Yakmut via RPD" <rpd at afrinic.net> escribió:

>

>

>

> What or who do we define as a newcomer?

>

> 1. Is it the person that boarded a plane and arrives at afrinic meeting

> for the first time.

>

> 2. A local who turned up at an afrinic meeting that is taking place in his

> community.

>

>

>

> I will assume that we are not thinking of denying someone who travel

> several hundred miles to afrinic meeting for the first time the opportunity

> to participate in an activity that is part of the experience of the meeting.

>

>

>

> I think we should critically look at bringing the newcomers up to speed

> and ensure they participate without any form of discrimination.

>

>

>

> So I stand against any form of isolation.

>

>

>

> On Sun, Nov 10, 2019, 10:59 PM Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>

> wrote:

>

> Owen, you seem the only one that objects to fix the current issue which

> most, at least form those who put up their view recognized needs change.

> The 'beautiful and utopic scenarios' you try to paint don't exist in

> practice and will never exist. Things must be practical and efficient and

> people clearly are being able to see the issue that needs improvement and

> fix. You even deny Board arbitration which is a quiet common thing on

> exception situations. I wonder who else would be able to do that in a

> simple and efficiently manner that could not be captured.

> Trying to keep the current scenario is really a waste of time and a

> invitation to those who diligently put up their efforts in this process to

> go away.

>

> Let's be practical. Perhaps there are adjustments to be made in the text,

> but maintaining the same scenario that allows anyone that shows up in a

> meeting in a 'ad-hoc' fashion and that has never participate before to

> decide just because it *may eventually happen that one or a few of them are

> able to properly do* is not reasonable at all with all others.

>

> Fernando

>

> On 10/11/2019 18:32, Owen DeLong wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> On Nov 10, 2019, at 05:43 , Chevalier du Borg <virtual.borg at gmail.com>

> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Le sam. 9 nov. 2019 à 23:36, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> a écrit :

>

>

>

>

>

> On Nov 9, 2019, at 01:07 , Ahile shagba francis <ahilefranc at gmail.com>

> wrote:

>

>

>

> The last elections in Kampala witnessed many weird practices. It was

> glaring that the process lacks so much to term it credible.

>

>  Some are forced to agree with the accusations of the person who sent some

> harsh words regards the manner in which students and locals where bought

> solely for the purpose of elections by some big wings who play the modern

> day slavery role.

>

>

>

> I take issue with this characterization.

>

>

>

> Bringing students and local IT professionals to the AfriNIC meeting is,

> IMHO, a laudable and useful way to expand our community

>

> and improve participation. I don’t know of anyone who was brought solely

> for the purpose of elections. All of the fellowships I am

>

> aware of provided for attendance at the full meeting.

>

>

>

>

>

> While some new comer were there for the meeting. It was clear a lot had

> come just to vote.  they were all sit in same place. they allmost all vote

> for the same person and they all shout in unity when that person won.

>

>

>

> Again, I think you are mistaken.

>

>

>

> I know several of the people who were sitting together in that block. Many

> of them were invited to participate by the candidate in question, but at

> least each of the ones I knew did attend multiple days of the meeting, not

> only

>

> the PDWG session where the election for co-chair was held.

>

>

>

> It’s not surprising that a group of people who know each other and live in

> the same community and work together in the same industry or attend the

> same school would want to sit together.

>

>

>

> It’s not surprising that they would support the candidate that is best

> known to them.

>

>

>

> How is that not legitimate?

>

>

>

> That must not be allow to continue.

>

>

>

> What, exactly is it that you feel was wrong here?

>

>

>

> I wish AfriNIC to BAN all newcommer from any kind of vote. They should

> listen, learn and participate in debate

>

>

>

> Many of them did participate in the debate making meaningful comments on

> multiple policy proposals.

>

>

>

> I wish AfriNIC to BAN all people who have not been register on PPML for at

> least 2 month before meeting

>

>

>

> Why is participation in an ARIN list required for participation in an

> AfriNIC meeting?

>

>

>

> Or did you mean to refer to RPD list?

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> I find it interesting that the call here is about the election in Kampala

> while nobody mentions what happened in Dakar.

>

>

>

> In Dakar, there were literally busloads of local people, many of whom had

> no relationship to IT.

>

> They showed up for lunch and the Co-Chair election and then departed never

> to be seen or heard from in the community again.

>

>

>

>

>

> They show up for lunch (quite another problem for NIC to fix), they was no

> patter of all of them voting for one candidate. In fact many of them leave

> after lunch so you are dishonest to say they came for co-chair election.

>

>

>

> I disagree… There was most definitely a pattern of them voting for the

> same candidate. The same pattern of sitting together and cheering that you

> object to above was also present in Dakar.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> In Kampala, there were a large number of local IT students and members of

> the IT profession who showed up for multiple days

>

> of the meeting in part because they were sponsored through fellowships.

>

>

>

>

>

> A tainted fellowship of questionable goal for this community.

>

>

>

> Tainted by what?

>

>

>

> Questionable in what way?

>

>

>

> Because you didn’t like the outcome or because you have some actual

> substantive objection beyond that?

>

>

>

> If you have a substantive objection, make it. Present evidence.

>

>

>

> Is there some reason these members of the IT community should be

> marginalized simply because it is their first meeting?

>

>

>

>

>

> Yes

>

>

>

> - any one who come just for lunch

>

>

>

> They didn’t.

>

>

>

> - any group who come for first time and vote on the same issue and same

> person is pervsesion of democracy and community trust

>

>

>

> Everyone who votes votes on the same issue. That’s the nature of a vote.

> As such, it is difficult to understand your concern here.

>

>

>

> I can also tell you that not every fellow who came voted for the same

> person. Yes, there was a visible contingency of fellows that did vote for

> this particular candidate, but you have no idea of the total number of

> fellows, nor do you know who the ones that were not part of that

> contingency voted for.

>

>

>

> To the best of my knowledge, none of the fellows was instructed in how to

> vote. I know there are accusations of that and if those accusations can be

> proven, then there is an actual perversion of democracy.

>

>

>

> However, disenfranchising voters simply because they are at their first

> meeting is also a perversion of democracy.

>

>

>

> same thing with people who don't live in Africa, don't have any business

> here constantly force their way on the community through very long post and

> policy that most african who are in the community for along time don't

> agree is benefit to the continent.

>

>

>

> An interesting perspective. If you truly feel this is the case, then

> propose rules which ban participation by those people. The current rules

> allow participation by anyone who chooses to participate and that is true

> of every RIR.

>

>

>

> We have a history of African participation in the ARIN region as well.

> Nobody has ever suggested that their participation was invalid even when

> much of the community may have disagreed with their positions.

>

>

>

> If the majority of the community does not want something, it will not

> reach consensus, so there is no possibility for “people who don’t live in

> Africa” to force their way on the community unless the majority of the

> community agrees with them.

>

>

>

> Are they in some way less qualified than other members attending their

> first meeting?

>

>

>

>

>

> yes. in the same way that you should not allow a person who is not

> American to vote in US election. These people most of them just corrupt the

> process. Few of them go on to register to mailing list. Few of them go on

> to post anything intelligent apart from +1 +10

>

>

>

> I am confused… These people were African. Many of them were from Uganda.

> Many of them were from other parts of Africa. To the best of my knowledge,

> registration on the mailing list was a condition of the fellowships, so I

> don’t believe your claim there is valid, either. In general, few of the

> people signed up for the mailing list post anything intelligent.

>

>

>

> Further, the definition of “intelligent” in this context is very

> subjective.

>

>

>

> One of those fellows is now a PDP co-chair.

>

>

>

> Do we feel that the current co-chairs are doing a bad job? Do we feel that

> they have misrepresented the community in some way?

>

>

>

> Newcomwers ought to have some knowledge about what AFRINIC in its entirety

> entails. So you can make decisions bore from conscience and sincere

> progress.

>

>

>

> How does a newcomer gain that knowledge without attending a meeting and

> observing the process first hand?

>

>

>

>

>

> Join mailing list before the meeting

>

>

>

> This was done.

>

>

>

> Register, attend the meeting and listen

>

>

>

> This was also done.

>

>

>

> But you know that not the problem. The problem is is when all newcomer,

> sit in same spot, vote for same person and oppose same proposal or support

> same proposal (whether francophone or anglophone) ... it  a sign that the

> PDP has been hijack by botmaster.

>

>

>

> I can absolutely guarantee you that this did not happen.

>

>

>

> Yes, many newcomers sat in the same spot and voted for the same person.

> Some subset of that group also expressed similar opinions on some of the

> proposals.

>

>

>

> There were many other newcomers of which you are apparently unaware that

> did not participate in any of the behavior you are expressing as

> problematic.

>

>

>

> If you believe that the PDP has been hijacked by a bot master, then please

> identify this bot master and the bots in question.

>

>

>

> If the PDP has been taken over by a bot master, then there would not be

> open debate or opposition. There would be easy consensus around each policy

> desired

>

> by said bot master.

>

>

>

> I haven’t seen easy consensus around anything at all controversial in

> AfriNIC in quite some time.

>

>

>

> Are you arguing that the co-chairs elected in Kampala are unqualified or a

> poor choice for the community? Are you arguing that the election had a bad

> outcome?

>

> If so, please offer some evidence to support this position.

>

>

>

> Many who are pushing for certain policies have failed to sit back and

> search themselves if they really are for the good of the RIR of they are

> just out chasing clout.

>

>

>

> Blanket accusations of malfeasance such as this are hollow and useless. If

> you have examples of such malfeasance, you don’t have to name names, but at

> least

>

> provide specific citations. Provide actual content or quotations or

> references to points on the video record of the meeting where such

> malfeasance is demonstrated.

>

>

>

>

>

> Like a non-African who does not live in Africa. Does not own a business in

> Africa try to shove policy down in AfriNIC?

>

>

>

> I don’t think this is responsive to the statement above. Does this mean

> you have no examples or evidence to present?

>

>

>

> Owen

>

>

>

>

>

>

> _______________________________________________

>

> 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

>

> _______________________________________________ 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.

>

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20191111/b67ed7a8/attachment-0001.html>