[rpd] Policy Development Process and Elections

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Hi Benjamin,

 

I agree with you. I said that already. The PDP is and should be 100% community driven.

 

However, the community never paid attention to develop and reach consensus in a process for elections in the PDP. This is our fault as a community.

 

Of course, this is because when we started AFRINIC, and we still didn’t had a PDP, policies are being developed by volunteer authors and it is not an easy task to keep going on to reach consensus, and if nobody “see” the problem (the elections one in this case), nobody will work on that.

 

As a consecuence the board, which is tasked by ICANN to make sure that the PDP works, did a procedure. This should be understood as a temporary procedure, because as said, the power for the PDP is from the community. This is why I agree that while we don’t have a PDP process, it is up to the board to keep managing it. Again, is our fault not having worked in something!

 

Some of us, finally worked on that in November 2019, but didn’t reached consensus. We are working now in a new version, but with community contributions it is not easy to make it happen. Here is the actual version:

 

https://www.afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2019-gen-007-d1#proposal

 

 

Regards,

Jordi

@jordipalet

 

 

 

El 15/8/20 13:34, "Benjamin Investor" <investor0189 at gmail.com> escribió:

 

Dear Fernando,

Let me help here.

1. My intension is not to defend the statistics. Cos I can also agree but an half empty cup can be discribed in two ways depending on what side you see it from ( half full or half empty). It a waste of time arguing that the cup is half empty when what you can see is half full cup.  But my question is can we say for definite that all of them joined for that single reason?. Is that fair? Yes they are all stakeholders. Stakeholders are not limited to resources holders. 

Let me be clear a Stakeholder in this community is ANYONE using the internet. Is that not your definition of who the stakeholders are?  IF you have a different definition of who the stakeholders are then please read about it. We are all stakeholders so no one can be stopped from participating. That is the fundamental rule. No argument about that.

2. Please focus on my suggested way forward. Do you see it as a fair way forward? 

3.  Where did we get too?  What got us here? It doesn't matter where we got too. The point is the solution must come from the community itself not from any other place. 

It must be an entirely community driving process. Otherwise we have the same problem we are running away from.  If you have a fair solution suggest it cos we need a community driving way forward.

 

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 11:29 PM Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com> wrote:

 

On 14/08/2020 18:37, Benjamin Investor wrote:

<clip>

 I believe the community needs to find a permanent solution if we have a problem, but my humble question to you and the board is that the people that have joined the mailing list in the last six month are they not stakeholders in this community? Even if they have joined to vote as you and the board are suggesting are they still not stakeholders. And according to the rpm "anyone" can contribute and at any time. What makes the person who joined 6 years ago more and has never said a word more qualified than the person who joined 6 days ago? Yes, I think there is a problem there but it is not for you or the board to solve this problem as rightly mentioned by Jordi.  What problem are you trying to solve with the 6 months and other rules set? During the next election, next year are we going to have an 18 months rule?. who says that we would be able to have a face to face meeting next year even if we have a face to face meeting how do we prevent hairdressers from coming in to vote? Or are we going to be changing the process all the time? is that a fair way of dealing with the issue.  Let us be realistic here. is your intention genuine or are we acting a script? Yes, Jordi has a policy proposal but what assurance do we have that the proposal would pass and be implemented before next year.  As far as I am concerned, we need to follow the rules in whatever we do fI not we have giving room for anarchy. The rule you are trying here is divisive and as seen it was rejected by a sizable number of people even thou it might be questionable but we say responses  If we agree to use this rule this time what stops the board from interfering in future elections. We are not looking at the future implication we are only trying to solve a short term problem and leaving behind a long term problem. The problem at hand must be solved by the community using the laid down process and not imposed by the CEO or the board. 

Not all that joined should necessarily be considered stakeholders. This is crystal clear and there must be something that guarantee that only those who are really involved are the ones able to participate on the decision. Having something like what happened in Kampala is not something to the whole community.

If you let ad hoc people to participate on the decision the same way others who invest efforts and time to work towards something important and to make the things work in a proper way you discourage all those who are willing to get things done in a proper way. It is unfair to them that just right before the election random people join. Simply it stimulates fraud and chaos !

Check out the number of people who joined last July compared to all other months. Does anyone really believe this is just normal interested people willing to participate long term and that most of them not just joined to be able to influence on the coming election process ?

 

The community is matured enough to deal with this issue and there is what we call expedited PDP process that is allowed in case we have this type of difficulty.  The co-chair is just a guide for the PDP process and the process is dictated by the community so why making a fuss out of nothing?

I don't agree there has been enough maturity to deal with the issue so far. Look where we got to. That sounds more like a desire than the reality.

Fernando

 

 

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020, 1:43 PM AFRINIC Communication <comms at afrinic.net> wrote:

[Version en français ci-dessous]

 

Dear colleagues,

Further to its communique issued on 5 August 2020, AFRINIC wishes to inform its community that following its announcement regarding the holding of the Policy Development Working Group (“PDWG”) Co-Chair and NRO ASO-AC elections for the year 2020, it has considered all responses obtained in respect thereof.

Consequently, AFRINIC considers it appropriate to clarify, for the benefits of its community, the following:

(a)   That the Public Policy Meeting (“PPM”) is convened by the AFRINIC Board of Directors pursuant to the provisions of articles 11.2 and 11.3 of the Bylaws;

(b)  That in regard to the election of the PDWG Co-Chair and notwithstanding the fact same is held during the PPM, section 3.1 of the Consolidated Policy Manual (“CPM”) clearly and in no uncertain terms provides as follows: - “Internet number resource policies are distinctly separate from AFRINIC general business practices and procedures. General business practices and procedures are not within the purview of the Policy Development Process. 

(c)   That in light of para (b) above, the election process applicable to the PDWG Co-Chair election does not form an integral part of the CPM and is thus a matter for the Board of Directors to determine;

(d)  That, consistent with the above and having considered the exceptional context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Board of Directors recently resolved, inter-alia, that the forthcoming PPM will be held virtually and has even caused an Election Process 2020 to be published applicable to all elections to be held during the year 2020;

(e)   That in so far as the role of the PDWG is concerned, the core responsibility of the latter is to discuss policy proposals via the Internet (mailing list) or in person (during face-to-face PPM). Hence, since time restrictions are prevalent for the policy discussions during the PPM, rough consensus of policy proposals is determined during the PPM by considering both online and on-site contributions. Final consensus is decided upon after consideration of the discussions in the Last Call period;

(f)   That the right attributed to its community to contribute to policy discussions by either subscribing to the rpd mailing list or participating in the discussions in the upcoming PPM by registering for and attending the online meeting is sacrosanct and AFRINIC hereby renews its commitment that it will continue to give full effect to the principles of Policy Development as stipulated in section 3.2 of the CPM;

(g)   That, for the purposes of para (e) above, subscription to the AFRINIC rpd mailing list is considered as a step towards participation in the PDWG and AFRINIC undertakes to preserve this right so that no one who has recently subscribed to the rpd mail list will be debarred and/or ‘disenfranchised’ from participating in the Policy Development Process.

(h)  For purposes of clarity, below are subscription numbers from January 2019 to 13 August 2020.

 

2019Number
January3
February8
March3
April9
May30
June53
July8
August11
September3
October4
November11
December18
2020
January1
February 13
March7
April2
May5
June9
July177
August 13th 12:50 UTC27
Current number of list subscribers986

On this note, AFRINIC encourages the PDWG to increase its engagement in the Policy Development Process through their active, substantial and constructive participation in developing resource policies that will help AFRINIC in its mission of managing Internet Number Resources for the African region.

Furthermore, AFRINIC would like to take this opportunity to renew its invitation to the AIS’20 meeting and recommend that the community follows all procedures put in place for their online registration in respect thereof.

 

Eddy Kayihura

CEO

 

……………………

 

 

Chers collègues,

 

Suite à son communiqué publié le 5 août 2020, l'AFRINIC souhaite informer sa communauté que suite à son annonce concernant la tenue des élections du co-président du groupe de travail sur l'élaboration des politiques ("PDWG") et de l'ASO-AC du NRO pour l'année 2020, elle a examiné toutes les réponses obtenues à cet égard.

 

En conséquence, AFRINIC considère qu'il convient de clarifier, pour le bénéfice de sa communauté, ce qui suit :

 

(a) Que la réunion de politique publique ("PPM") est convoquée par le Conseil d'administration de l'AFRINIC conformément aux dispositions des articles 11.2 et 11.3 des statuts ;

 

(b) En ce qui concerne l'élection du co-président du PDWG, et bien qu'elle ait lieu pendant la Réunion de politique publique, la section 3.1 du Consolidated Policy Manual ("CPM") prévoit clairement et sans ambiguïté ce qui suit : - "Les politiques en matière de ressources de numéros Internet se distinguent clairement des pratiques opérationnelles et des procédures générales d'AFRINIC, qui ne sont pas du resort du processus d'élaboration des politiques''. 

 

c) Qu'à la lumière du paragraphe b) ci-dessus, le processus d'élection applicable à l'élection du coprésident du PDWG ne fait pas partie intégrante du CPM et donc est du ressort du conseil d'administration ;

 

(d) Que, conformément à ce qui précède et après avoir pris en compte le contexte exceptionnel de la pandémie COVID-19, le Conseil d'administration a récemment décidé, entre autres, que la prochaine réunion de politiques publiques se tiendra virtuellement et a même fait publier un processus pour les élections pour l'année 2020 applicable à toutes les élections devant se tenir en 2020 ;

 

e) Que, en ce qui concerne le rôle du PDWG, la responsabilité principale de ce dernier est de discuter des propositions politiques via Internet (liste de diffusion) ou en personne (lors de la réunion en face-à-face). Par conséquent, étant donné que le temps imparti aux discussions politiques pendant la réunion est limité, un consensus approximatif sur les propositions politiques sera déterminé pendant la réunion en tenant compte des contributions en ligne et sur place. Le consensus final sera décidé après examen des discussions durant la période du dernier appel ;

 

(f) que le droit attribué à sa communauté de contribuer aux discussions politiques, soit en s'inscrivant à la liste de diffusion rpd, soit en participant aux discussions de la prochaine Réunion de politiques publiques en s'inscrivant et en assistant à la réunion en ligne est sacro-saint et que l'AFRINIC renouvelle par la présente son engagement à continuer à donner plein effet aux principes d'élaboration des politiques comme stipulé dans la section 3.2 de la CPM ;

 

(g) Que, aux fins du paragraphe (e) ci-dessus, l'inscription à la liste de diffusion rpd d'AFRINIC est considérée comme une étape vers la participation au PDWG et AFRINIC s'engage à préserver ce droit afin qu'aucune personne qui s'est récemment inscrite à la liste de diffusion rpd ne soit exclue et/ou "privée" de sa participation au processus d'élaboration des politiques.

 

(h) Par souci de clarté, voici le nombre d'abonnement de janvier 2019 au 13 août 2020.

 

 

2019Nombres
Janvier3
Février8
Mars3
Avril9
Mai30
Juin53
Juillet8
Août11
Septembre3
Octobre4
Novembre11
December18
2020
Janvier1
Février 13
Mars7
Avril2
Mai5
Juin9
Juillet177
Août 13 12:50 UTC27
Nombre d'abonnements actuels986
 

 

Sur cette note, AFRINIC encourage le PDWG à accroître son engagement dans le processus d'élaboration des politiques à travers leur participation active, substantielle et constructive dans l'élaboration des politiques de ressources qui contribueront à aider AFRINIC dans sa mission de gestion des ressources numériques Internet pour la région africaine.

 

En outre, AFRINIC voudrait saisir cette occasion pour renouveler son invitation à la réunion de l'AIS'20 et recommander que la communauté suive toutes les procédures mises en place pour leur inscription en ligne à cet égard.

 

Eddy Kayihura

CEO

_______________________________________________
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

_______________________________________________ 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/20200816/e2640a58/attachment-0001.html>