[rpd] Co-Chair Election Process

[Patrick Okui]

Hi all,

On 19 Jul 2020, at 1:54 EAT, Owen DeLong wrote:


> Vote could then literally be taken by show of hands (virtually every 

> conferencing system supports some variant of the “raised hand” 

> metaphor) and it would be almost entirely compliant with the existing 

> PDP. The small changes necessary (virtual vs. in-person raised hands) 

> are well within the “co-chairs may vary the process as necessary to 

> meet exceptional circumstances” clause (paraphrased).



I think this proposal to just use the online “raise of hands” or 
“inbuilt poll” etc methods that our conferencing system may have for 
voting for our co-chairs is what we should do for a few reasons.

1. This is the same method that we’re likely to use to gauge consensus 
to policy (including any policy changes to voting). If we’re happy to 
use this method to gauge governing policy consensus (including any 
policies that change our voting) then surely we should be fine with it 
gauging consensus in who should moderate us reaching this consensus.

2. For the past many years, people who are unable to attend the PDP 
meetings in person have been able to voice their opinions remotely. 
Typically a member of AFRINIC staff will read out the opinions in the 
online channel at the floor mic. These opinions count towards consensus. 
Some policies currently in effect have been passed using this combined 
consensus. Moving to where everyone is now remote is not a big jump in 
my opinion, and is not restricted by our current rules otherwise the 
voices of remote participants would not have been read out in 
face-to-face meetings. Note that there currently aren’t any special 
identity verification procedures for remote participants and neither are 
there any specific ones for people who show up in person.

As for proposals to facilitate different voting systems or possibly 
limit who can vote in our various elections, I think a few things need 
to be considered by the authors and the RPD:

1. These policies should not be developed in an online-only vacuum 
without applying similar ideas (limitations etc) to the on-site voting. 
Historically that has caused lots of angst.

2. We should not only concentrate on leadership voting but also on our 
very policies that govern us.

3. One of the founding ideas of this discussion group is to have our RIR 
managed by an open process. The first two lines on 
https://afrinic.net/policy capture exactly what I mean. As we try to 
insert measures to verify people’s identities or legitimacy to vote, I 
think it’s crucial we do not alienate some groups of people who have 
contributed a lot to the AIS ecosystem but are very likely to be 
_”late to the party”_. Examples include:
   - The localhost for AIS + AFRINIC meetings who almost never register 
until the advance team from AFRINIC and AFNOG arrive on site a week 
before the first events.
   - Participants of the AFNOG, ISOC, AFRINIC, etc workshops who are 
informed by their instructors on how they can contribute to AIS in 
general.
   - Fellows from the various conference fellowship programs who 
typically don’t register until their fellowship is confirmed.

   Many of the people who have been in our leadership or contributed to 
this forum started out as one or more of the above categories. As we 
strive to verify identity (and deal with other concerns with our current 
system) I think it’s crucial that we don’t lose our ethos of 
inclusion.


--
patrick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200720/bf7288d1/attachment-0001.html>