[rpd] Reversal of Consensus on Resource Transfer Policy

[Ibeanusi Elvis]

Dear community;

Hello Mike,
I would like to ask a question: following your “puppet echo chambers”
comment, with all the support you are currently getting, the +1’s and all:
are those your “puppet echo chambers” as well? Just asking.

The purpose of this rpd list is to create a platform that welcomes all
opinions and suggestions that will aid to the development and advancement
of the AFRINIC organization and the African region. So whether people
support and object a proposal, an appeal, opinion, action by anyone; that
does make those group of people in support or against an echo chamber or
echo gang members.

Let’s cross examine our thoughts before putting it into words and mostly
especially score sending it here. Thanks

Elvis.

On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 01:22, Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:


> Hi,

>

> On 18/10/2020 13:07, Ekaterina Kalugina wrote:

> > Dear all,

> >

> > First of all, dear Fernando, when you say to someone "do not deceive

> > yourself" that is a direct personal attack and it is highly

> > inappropriate. I would like to ask you again to refrain from such

> behavior.

>

> In my opinion, the "Do not deceive yourself" was in response to an email

> from Lucilla (and quoting said email), that

> - told the chairs what they should do

> - did not consider the circumstances that

>    a) there are serious arguments about procedures, and

>    b) there is an appeal

>

> In my opinion Lucilla's email was an encouragement to not follow PDWG

> procedure.

> Or how should we understand "The policy shall now move to ratification."

> while there is an appeal?

>

> So while we all want to believe that there was no malicious intent, I

> believe it's useful to request others to get their facts right.

>

>

> > Secondly, I would like to support the decision of the chairs to extend

> > the last call. Many of you have repeatedly said that more time is needed

> > to discuss the resource transfer policy.

>

> And in that case it should not be in last-call at all and should be

> referred back to the mailing list for discussion.

> This the established procedure which was used many many times.

> It seems (to me) that only very recently it has become fashionable to

> diverge from the PDWG procedures. I might be wrong.

>

>

> > The chairs have listened to

> > your pleas and gave an extension. And now you're not happy with it

> either?

>

> That is a valid position, and you try to make it look unreasonable. But

> it is reasonable.

>

> > I think the chairs have been doing their best to act for the benefit of

> > the community and I fully support their decision.

>

> This is noted.

> And if you repeat it a few more times, you will also tolerate others

> repeating the opposite view several times.

> Thanks.

>

> Regards,

> Frank

>

>

> >

> > Best,

> >

> > Ekaterina

> >

> > On Sun, 18 Oct 2020, 11:30 Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com

> > <mailto:amelnaud at gmail.com>> wrote:

> >

> >     +1000000... @Noah

> >

> >     Le sam. 17 oct. 2020 à 21:04, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz

> >     <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> a écrit :

> >

> >

> >         On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 7:09 PM ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE

> >         <oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng <mailto:oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng>>

> >         wrote:

> >

> >             Dear colleagues,

> >

> >             Despite our belief

> >

> >

> >         Just to remind that the PDWG workings are based on objective

> >         facts and not co-chairs continued beliefs.

> >

> >

> >             that this policy has covered almost all of the concerns

> >             raised especially the major objections, we would like to

> >             give the community more time to discern after considering

> >             the community's feedback on the consensus declared on the

> >             Resource Transfer Polic.

> >

> >

> >         On the contrary the said policy is under an appeal which you are

> >         very much aware of and as such, what you are doing now is

> >         another violation of the process considering the fact that you

> >         did nothing to resolve the concerns raised by WG but rather

> >         proclaim consensus regardless of countless requests by the

> >         working group for co-chairs to reconsider your decision weeks

> back.

> >

> >

> >             We, the co-chairs, have changed our decision and opt to

> >             extend the last call for one more week for prudence's sake.

> >

> >

> >         Please don't turn the process into some game where decisions are

> >         always changing at your own pleasure as co-chairs.

> >

> >         This is unprecedented and unbelievable.....gosh.

> >

> >

> >         Noah

> >         _______________________________________________

> >         RPD mailing list

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

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

> >         <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

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

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > RPD mailing list

> > 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/20201019/abc85a74/attachment.html>