[rpd] Policy Development Process and Elections

[Daniel Yakmut]

My dear Owen, I don't consider my opinion as being rude, that is purely
your perception and interpretation.

On Aug 16, 2020 10:15 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:




> On Aug 16, 2020, at 11:26 AM, Daniel Yakmut via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>

wrote:

>

> I want to State as follows:

>

> 1. I am very disturb with the action the CEO and the board are about to

take. If the CEO and the Board had an opinion on the elections, why did
they disturb us by asking an opinion. Subjecting us to sheer exercise that
is fruitless was a bad precedent and can have adverse effects in future.
The attempt to hijack the process of the election by the board regardless
of what the bylaw (which is flawed) says, is not right.

Your statement above is condescending, rude, and outright incorrect. They
asked our opinions and considered our input. They came to a conclusion that
was supported and suggested by several people on the list. It’s a
compromise position that incorporates opinions from several different
posters. I am not sure (short of completely adopting your personal
position) what it is you think they could have done to better represent the
diverse opinions received in their call for comments.


My dear Owen, I don't consider my opinion as being condescending and rude,
that is purely your perception and interpretation. Possibly, your opinion
was considered and you should be satisfied with that.



> 2. The attempt to gag and manipulate the process is more shocking, as it

is being attempted through closing the doors on who is qualify to vote. In
the face to face meeting I can register and attend and vote without being
subscribed to the rpd. So why will we say some people cannot vote if they
are not in mailing list fors six. I will rather suggest voter register
closes a week before voting.

There were more than 10 times as many (and nearly 100 times as many)
registrations in July as normal. I think that a June cutoff is a reasonable
response to a perceived abuse attempt against the election. I’m not sure
whether I agree with it or not, but I cannot support the idea of calling it
unreasonable or claiming that the board is acting in clear violation of
their mandate.


Why are we cutting off July, we could have said no one who subscribed to
rpd in 2020 should vote. Is there a proof that the spike in subscription
was for the purpose of abuse attempt against the election? I am simply
suspecting that our hurried decision to conduct the online election could
have triggered the spike. Just as we usually see a spike of attendees at
public policy days, especially when elections will take place, I saw that
in the past meeting in Dakar.



> 3. However, I am still of the opinion that conducting an online voting is

not expedient this year. Hence, the one year old and extension is still
worth considering.

You’ve been heard and the board addressed your proposal in their original
response, stating that for a variety of reasons they felt that action would
be counter-productive.


It still remains the board's decision, but not likely the best decision.



> 4. What could possibly be the legal implications of the board hijacking

the responsibility of the PDWG and going against good advise to postpone
and make things right first.

Calling it “good advice” is your personal opinion. Others felt it was not
so good advice. If you measure every conclusion against your own opinion,
you are certainly destined to be disappointed more often than not. The real
question is did the board come to a rational conclusion that makes a good
faith effort to resolve the issue in a manner commensurate with the mission
of AfriNIC.


Just as your opinions are personal. I don't have to accept it, if I feel it
is unreasonable. Possibly, the board's conclusion may be rational,but I
can't see that and I have the right to disagree.

IMHO, they did, even if it isn’t the exact solution I would have chosen.
Yes, there are open “letter of the law” questions attached to this
approach, but every possible approach has some variant of “letter of the
law” questions associated with it. I trust the board sought advice on this
aspect. Perhaps you could gain more by inquiring as to what that advice was
rather than throwing (unwarranted) accusations of malfeasance.


> 5. Finally, I feel unhappy with how I was played.


I’m not sure what this is intended to mean. Who allegedly played you and
how? Are you a musical instrument or a game in this statement?


If you never know, you never know. I was a player that played a cunningly
staged game.

Simply,
Daniel and I are looking


Owen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200817/7da99c6c/attachment.html>