[rpd] New Proposal Received | Simple PDP Update for the new “Normal” (Draft-1)

[Fernando Frediani]

On 16/09/2020 05:05, Beatrix Kispal wrote:

> <clip>

>

> Furthermore, constantly following the mailing list, reading every 

> entry is extremely time consuming, it requires so much effort and 

> resources therefore would strongly support to sticking to the old 

> normal and keeping the Policy Development Process on its own 

> designated day, when all present participants are present and fully 

> dedicated.

>

If one doesn't have time to read all emails and discussions then that 
person may not have time to participate and that's a personal choice. 
When I decide to participate on any forum I put time aside to be able to 
properly participate on whatever discussions I find important.
The process is opened and whoever wishes may participate. The most 
important discussions happen on the email list, not on a one-day event.

A one day event may have the potential to be easily manipulated by 
someone who have economic interest and be able to pay for people to be 
in the meeting just for an very specific reason and never more appear in 
the PDP.

Fernando


> Best wishes,

> Beatrix

>

>

> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 at 09:22, Cathie Jay <cathie.kay89 at gmail.com 

> <mailto:cathie.kay89 at gmail.com>> wrote:

>

>     Dear Jordi, dear community,

>

>     I oppose this policy because of the way in which consensus is reached.

>     The current policy stipulates that consensus should be reached through

>     the balancing of the mailing list and forum, and not during the PPM.

>     Such policy could pave the way for the intrusion of fake emails within

>     the discussion, which could endanger the process of reaching a fair

>     consensus, and jeopardize the process of policy-making. In addition,

>     it would significantly undermine the work of the co-chairs who will

>     facilitate the discussion.

>

>     All best wishes,

>

>     Cathie

>

>     On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 11:26 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

>     <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:

>     >

>     > Hi Chloe,

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > Exactly! I just responded to that to Gaby.

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > Tks!

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > Regards,

>     >

>     > Jordi

>     >

>     > @jordipalet

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > El 9/9/20 13:00, "Chloe Kung" <chloe.kung.public at gmail.com

>     <mailto:chloe.kung.public at gmail.com>> escribió:

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > Hi,

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > I actually think section 3.4.3 is adequate as the discussion

>     period of each policy proposal is a good 8 weeks. If there is no

>     major objection based on technical justification submitted during

>     the 8 weeks, the chance of having one during the last call period

>     is very small. Even so, the community still have more time than

>     needed to address and discuss the matter. Also this section states

>     and I quote "Within 1 week after the end of the last call, the

>     Working Group Chairs shall confirm whether consensus is

>     maintained.” So if there is such case, meaning the consensus

>     cannot be maintained, it will fall back into the discussion period

>     anyway.

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > Best,

>     >

>     > Chloe

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     >

>     > _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list

>     RPD at afrinic.net <mailto: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.

>     >

>     > _______________________________________________

>     > 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

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> 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/20200916/cf287d3a/attachment.html>