[rpd] Policy Proposal: PDP Working Group (WG) Guidelines and Procedures

[Marcus K. G. Adomey]

Fernando,

The question is a binary one and the answer should be either “yes” or “no”.

I can see your answer to this in one of your recent posts with “ because RIPE has it, we must have it”

I have not seen anyone saying this apart from you.

I saw a response to your statement “ that election by consensus was utopic and not for the real work” which points to working groups in ripe region.

Once this argument for your opposition has been cleared, let move to something else.



Marcus






________________________________
From: Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 5:27 PM
To: rpd at afrinic.net <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Policy Proposal: PDP Working Group (WG) Guidelines and Procedures


You must be joking with it or trying to make tricks and I am having a serious discussion.


I already answered your question very clearly in the previous message very clearly. If you wish to discuss it in a serious way please go straight to the point.


Fernando


On 29/08/2020 14:21, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote:
Hi Fernando,

Let me not get involve at this stage in the discussions about which model of election is good or bad for the PDPWG.

You have not answered my question. I am posting it again.

I would like to find out whether you agree that the election by consent is used by working groups in RIPE region?

Please do justice to it.

Thanks


Marcus



________________________________
From: Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com><mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2020 2:29 PM
To: rpd at afrinic.net<mailto:rpd at afrinic.net> <rpd at afrinic.net><mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Policy Proposal: PDP Working Group (WG) Guidelines and Procedures


Seems the authors are actually repeating the same arguments and points.
I am instead putting the many reasons election by consensus is not feasible, specially in this scenario we are going through currently.

What doubt you have about this position regardless the RIR or region ? Perhaps you should read the messages again.


Fernando


On 29/08/2020 10:31, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote:
Hi Fernando,

Thank you for your reaction but it appears you are not discussing but repeating yourself with no value add.

I would like to find out whether you agree that the election by consent is used by working groups in RIPE region?

Thanks



Marcus

________________________________
From: Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com><mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, August 28, 2020 7:26 PM
To: rpd at afrinic.net<mailto:rpd at afrinic.net> <rpd at afrinic.net><mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Policy Proposal: PDP Working Group (WG) Guidelines and Procedures

Hello

If we are having all this trouble to define the next elections probably
because there are multiple people interested in the next elections, how
can we dream about any consensus ?

Consensus is for proposals, for a collaborative improving process that
may take months or even more than an year, not for electing people.
What is the fear to have a proper vote process ? 1 person 1 vote and the
candidate with most votes wins and servers the term. What can go wrong ?
When one is elected with most votes and there are no signals of fraud
there is no room for disputes and discussions.

Qualified people are people who effectively participate in the
construction of the process, who are truly part of it and have
commitment to it and not someone who is just passing in front of the
door once in a lifetime.

Afrinic PDP doesn't even have yet the possibility the Board to appoint
interim Co-Chairs when necessary.

Fernando

On 28/08/2020 15:16, ALAIN AINA via RPD wrote:

> Hello,

>

> Below are our  responses to  last comments received on list on this proposal.

>

>

> ###### Comment 1

> Elections by consent is not for real world.

> #######

>

> It does work for working groups chairs selection in RIPE region

>

> ##### Comment 2

> It's just something too utopic.

> #######

>

> As  utopic as  how “rough consensus” appear until you experiment it and cherish

>

> ###### Comment3

> Election by vote where qualified people (with minimal requirements) vote and the candidate with the highest votes win, works in most places in the world with less margin  for further disputes

> ######

>

> there are many models of elections with different ways of qualifying voters, determining the winners, etc....

> What you described is just one the them. Not one fits all.

>

> Each  region adopts the best model for its PDP and how chairs/lead for the PDP activities are selected.

> https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/rir-comparison-table/

>

> One can see for example that in the case of LACNIC where, there is an electronic votes by those subscribed to the policy mailing list, the elections results “must” be ratified by consensus among those present  at the PPM as judged by the acting chairs. If results can’t be rectified, board appoint an interim chair.

>

> The AFRINIC PDPWG adopted in the past  the model of  votes by those physical present at the PPM, until it showed its limit recently.

>

> Can you please elaborate on how the “qualified people” should be selected in the context the PDPWG for the online voting and how to prevent abuse and further disputes?

>

>

> HTH

>

> —Alain

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd


_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
RPD at afrinic.net<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200830/c17466fb/attachment-0001.html>