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

[Noah]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2020, 21:15 Owen DeLong, <owen at delong.com> wrote:


>

> However, ranked choice voting is a kind of mathematically forced consensus

> and quite different from consensus voting as practiced in RIPE working

> groups. If the authors wish to modify their proposal to suggest a

> ranked-choice voting ballot, then I would not have a problem with that

> aspect of the proposal. That’s not what the current language calls for.

>


Hi Owen

Actually the current language calls for vote by ranked-choice voting only
when the consensus based approach can’t be achieved.

The proposed process takes into consideration the following;

1. Allow all those who are present (physically and remote) to participate
in the election by consensus.

2. If consensus can’t be reached then allow voting with a secret ballot
using ranked choice voting (IRV).

3. If it becomes impossible to hold secret ballot in step 2 above, then the
seat is declared vacant and the board chair appoints an interim cochair.

The expectation is that the first option ( consensus based ) suffices most
of the time since voting  is to be avoided as much as possible in the
context of the PDWG.

The spirit of volunteerism with an objective to serve the working group by
those who aspire to be cochairs should be the goal above competitive
elections which in most cases are subjective since personal interest
supersedes collective community interest.

Cheers,
Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20200901/1a2256b0/attachment.html>