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

[Gaby Giner]

*(resent this one here to make it easier to follow)*

Hello, Mike (and others),

With all due respect, I made an effort to properly introduce myself to you
and everyone else because there was technically nothing wrong with you
asking me to do so, and in order to make other acquaintances through this
mailing list, all the while being a constructive addition just like the
rest. But me doing so, or anyone else in the future should never be an
opportunity to make them feel inferior or underestimated. We all have our
added value in this list, regardless of our backgrounds and studies, and
should feel welcome, which is the main reason why I joined this community
in the first place.

Regardless of all of this, I will consider this a simple miscommunication
and still make the effort of clarifying a few things. From my educational
background, I did study different models of policymaking. I may not have
practical experience at the moment regarding this very specific niche, but
there's the knowledge that transcends various fields of studies. As Pierre
Bourdieu would have it, we have different habitus because we have different
backgrounds, but we are now interacting in the same field. Similar to the
fact that you, (Mike) are a lawyer, I draw my own conclusions based on my
own knowledge and understanding.

Sometimes a complicated system is a complicated system, and we don't need
practical experiences to identify it when it's just obvious. Give a kid a
bad and good apple, and he'd pick the good one to eat (hopefully, not
before biting the bad one). It's not rocket science, really. Occam's razor
and all that. Keep everything as simple as it can be, and if there is a
working model, let's not complicate it further UNLESS the value presented
by a newer model trumps what the current system has. Additionally, Jordi
gave a very relevant point where other RIRs can make the election by
consensus work because they have different norms or contexts versus AFRINIC
so we don't need to change anything at the moment.

I would also like to address the "copying other's opinions" ridiculous
allegations. As far as I know, you can either support a policy or oppose
it, as long as you have a reason to do so. And I surely gave mine, just
like anyone else, which is within my rights in this community. And
obviously, chances are high of having similar criticism points if several
people point out the same issue at once. Instead of taking it personally,
we should see it as constructive criticism and work on it. Isn't that the
primary goal of our discussions? Trying to improve the policies so as to
satisfy every member of the community all while benefitting the region?

But to answer your questions, Greg, I am referring to the election by
consensus of which I am against, at present. I also agree with you - there
seem to be some political machinations to advance their own agenda, but I
am reserving comments at the moment because I am still studying the lay of
the land, so to speak. My main issue is the structure of the proposed
elections: even if you voluntarily put yourself forward for the position,
you'd need people to vote you in officially. It's working for the status
quo, so there is no need to change it unless the proposed has a definite
advantage over it (which at the moment I cannot see) because it's just like
a rehash of the current electoral system.

To resume, as long as the CPM remains open to everyone, as enshrined in CPM
3.2.1, I will be here, and it will be to my own discretion. Mr. Frediani,
showing my face on my profile should not be anyone's concern. I have the
freedom to share as much as I want, when it comes to the internet and
social media, which I have my personal opinions about. Plus, I don't see
everyone on this list having a picture of themselves on their profile, and
no one ever seemed to have an issue about it. But rest assured, I'll make
sure my points are valid enough for anyone here to argue/support.
And, going back, it is deeply offensive and inappropriate to assume that I,
as a young individual and member of this list, cannot form or have a
personal opinion without it being influenced by a certain someone or
something. As a relatively fresh graduate, I still have a firm and
principled view of the world, especially as a member of the academe. I'm
sure the world will take away my rose-colored lenses soon enough, but I'm
still enjoying it. I am sure this wouldn't have happened if any other male
member from this list expressed his opposition. Very disappointing. I
really hope at the end of the day, it isn't the case. And yes, I did take
up gender studies, to add credence to this statement.

Finally, I'd like to thank everyone that made me feel welcome on this list.
I am here to learn and to contribute as much as I can to benefit this
community. I am absolutely open to further constructive discussions about
future policies, but I abhor patronizing and condescension masked as
"constructive criticism".

Looking forward to achieving (and learning) more with you guys.

Sincerely, Gaby


On Sun, Aug 30, 2020, 12:29 AM Mike Silber, <silber.mike at gmail.com> wrote:


> Thank you Gabrielle

>

> I do appreciate you taking the time to introduce yourself.

>

> I do however find it rather strange that you oppose the policy on the

> basis of “unnecessary complexity”, yet by your own admission you have

> absolutely no operational or compliance expertise. That makes me wonder if

> you are being encouraged to express that view, rather than deriving your

> opinion from your own experience.

>

> Unlike you - I do have various on-line profiles which you can easily

> access. But let me make it easier - a South African lawyer

> (non-practicing), group regulatory head for a pan-African data provider,

> AfriNIC appointee to the ASO AC, and current and former member of several

> national and international non-profit boards in the data, Internet and

> connectivity ecosystem.

>

> Pleased to make your acquaintance.

>

> Mike

>

> On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 at 17:30, Gaby Giner <gabyginernetwork at gmail.com>

> wrote:

>

>> Hi Mike,

>>

>> Nice to e-meet you, and thank you for asking.

>>

>> While studying at Ateneo de Davao University, I came across Internet

>> Governance, and I thought that it's a cool concept to explore. I have a

>> background in International Public Policy, International Security,

>> International Public Economy, and Public International Law, among others,

>> regarding policymaking and drafting. So I see the value in hearing out

>> others and crafting a well-rounded policy that does not trample on any

>> stakeholders and duty-bearers but leaves room for improvement.

>>

>> Although I'm a woman in an admittedly male-dominated field, I still am

>> very keen to learn more about it. I'm also looking for job opportunities

>> that are network/Internet-related. I was actually supposed to go to

>> AFRINIC/ICANN but wasn't able to do so because of COVID-19. Hence, I'd like

>> to join the mailing list prior to joining the actual event next time.

>> Although I'm a beginner, I'd still want to contribute to a better Internet.

>> Despite my educational background, I know that praxis is an even better

>> teacher which is the reason why I am here talking to you.

>>

>> That's by and large my background. As I'm a newbie, could you also

>> briefly introduce yourself? I've heard about you, vaguely, but I am

>> interested in knowing who the people I would potentially be discussing

>> policies with. Again, I am grateful that you have approached me - a

>> newcomer with questions. Hope that we can meet in person at the meeting

>> someday.

>>

>> Sincerely, Gabrielle.

>>

>>

>> On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 9:20 PM Mike Silber <silber.mike at gmail.com>

>> wrote:

>>

>>> Hi Gabrielle

>>>

>>> Would you mind introducing yourself and explaining your involvement in

>>> network operations?

>>>

>>> I am unable to identify a public profile that aligns with your

>>> involvement in the PDP. I think clarity on your identity will add credence

>>> to your opposition (or not).

>>>

>>> Thanks

>>>

>>> Mike

>>>

>>> On Sat, 29 Aug 2020 at 12:07, Gaby Giner <gabyginernetwork at gmail.com>

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> Hello, all.

>>>>

>>>> I am against this policy because I think it adds unnecessary complexity

>>>> to what should be a relatively simple low-overhead process. It does so in a

>>>> way that will result in confusion, disagreement, and fractious behavior in

>>>> the community.

>>>>

>>>> Besides, proposing to pick the next co-chairs on the mailing list based

>>>> on consensus instead of actual elections at the policy meeting is

>>>> unnecessary, unfair, and has less transparency than the actual election

>>>> process that has no flaw in it.

>>>>

>>>> Sincerely, Gabrielle.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>>

>>>> RPD mailing list

>>>>

>>>> 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/20200901/f6b403cc/attachment-0001.html>