Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Reversal of Consensus on Resource Transfer Policy
Ekaterina Kalugina
kay.k.prof at gmail.com
Mon Oct 19 12:24:23 UTC 2020
Dear community,
Dear Noah, why does it sound like you're trying to undermine my attempts at
steering the conversation into a more productive track and away from
personal attacks and accusations?
Dear Marcus,
The chairs have the right to defend their decision in the face of those who
try to undermine these decisions without providing any tangible proof of
their claims.
You do not seem to like the fact that the chairs defend their decisions,
yet you as well fail to provide any concrete evidence of any misconduct.
This wastes the time of everyone involved.
Dear Frank
Please find my comments in-line.
On Mon, 19 Oct 2020, 12:06 Frank Habicht <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 19/10/2020 12:23, Ekaterina Kalugina wrote:
> > The first fact is that making changes to the policy during the last call
> > is not prohibited by the CPM. And it is in the spirit of the law to make
> > the necessary changes during the last call.
>
> I disagree (as stated before) and I look forward to your arguments
> supporting this assertion.
> Because "necessary" might mean extensive, which I say is no permitted by
> the spirit of the law. You stating the opposite will not convince me
> otherwise.
>
I'm not going to try to convince you of anything because I do not think
that you're open to changing your opinions. I would though like to draw
attention to the fact that arguing in terms of the spirit of the law would
lead to a dead end. The spirit of the law is not as objective as the letter
of the law. In fact, by definition it is the the spirit implies the
intention behind the law. And that is always open to interpretation. You
think it's against the spirit to make changes. I think it is in accordance
with it. Therefore, this is not a valid argument for either of us.
But the fact remains: the letter of the PDP does not prohibit changes
during the last call. That much is objective and ought to be taken
seriously.
> ...
>
> > Thirdly, the fact that the policy addresses "almost all" concerns does
> > not disqualify it from being on the last call. The policy is moved onto
> > the last call when a rough consensus is achieved. And rough consensus
> > does not imply that everyone must agree.
>
> But it means that all valid concerns should have been addressed.
>
> > It means that there should be a
> > sense of general agreement as per the determination of the chairs. Which
> > we had.
> >
> > Then the policy is moved to the last call where it is then edited so
> > that a proper consensus could be achieved.
>
> the consensus has to be there already, and editorial changes (agreed
> upon) can be done. not bigger changes. Trust me.
>
The policy is not decided based on trust. So could you please cite the
article of the CPM where this is stated?
>
> > Since this have proved to be
> > tenuous journey, it only makes sense that the chairs have extended the
> > last call to make sure that all of the issues were properly addressed.
>
> Has anybody done that, until now?
>
Unprecedented times require unprecedented measures. The fact that no one
has done it before does not mean that it should not be done.
>
>
> > And this is what we should focus on: let us try to find a compromise on
> > this issue that can satisfy all of us as much as possible. Let us
> > discuss the policy in question, raise all the concerns that still
> > remain and try to find the best solution for the region
>
> I believe some were raised and not yet addressed.
>
Can you please specify exactly what concerns remain unaddressed so we can
actually have a purposeful discussion?
Finally, I agree with Joshua. There is no point of wasting each other's
time, so let us try to focus on the policies in question instead.
Best,
Ekaterina
>
> Frank
>
>
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Ekaterina
> >
> > On Mon, 19 Oct 2020, 09:28 Daniel Yakmut via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net
> > <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> >
> > I use Gmail, because i don't want to clog my official mailbox with
> > irrelevances. However, I can't be label suspect.
> >
> > If you do not know the person, and is of interest to you then make
> > effort to reach out to the person. Note, there maybe ghost IDs.
> >
> > On 19/10/2020 7:58 am, Mark Elkins wrote:
> >>
> >> Mike, I agree with your summary. I'd also add that people who use
> >> gmail addresses also add a little suspicion unless I actually know
> >> them.
> >>
> >> On 2020/10/19 08:36, Mike Silber wrote:
> >>> Amazing that my mail to “Lamiaa” is answered by “Lucilla” (with a
> >>> quick response by “Gabi”).
> >>>
> >>> This is a response to the list, as I see little point in
> >>> responding to an identity whose provenance and identity is still
> >>> uncertain.
> >>>
> >>> I relish different opinions. For example - my friend Noah and I
> >>> disagree on many things. However:
> >>>
> >>> - I have met him;
> >>> - I have been on calls with him;
> >>> - I know what networks he operates;
> >>> - I know his technical background and experience.
> >>>
> >>> So when we disagree, I have to afford him the respect he deserves
> >>> because I have data. I either understand his perspective (even
> >>> though I think it may be wrong) or at least I understand his
> >>> motivations.
> >>>
> >>> Through it all - he has worked to earn the respect of all of us
> >>> by his commitment to the community and the process.
> >>>
> >>> However, with you and your echo chamber and despite the cutesy
> >>> introductions when I first raised my concern - I have never met
> >>> you, never been on a call with you, don’t know what network you
> >>> operate or your technical expertise. I don’t have any inclination
> >>> of your perspective or motivation.
> >>>
> >>> As such, it seems that your (collective) motivation is to
> >>> manipulate the process towards a particular objective.
> >>>
> >>> This is not the first time the mailing list has been manipulated
> >>> and I am sure it won’t be the last. Some people I call (or used
> >>> to call) friends have used sock puppets to manipulate process and
> >>> spew hatred.
> >>>
> >>> I am calling it out here because I think we have a problem that
> >>> we have just swept under the rug before - we allow identities
> >>> without confirmation to participate.
> >>>
> >>> For example - ICANN working groups have developed a “statement of
> >>> interest” requirement for participation that tries to filter sock
> >>> puppets and force disclosure of interest.
> >>>
> >>> I think that the situation in the PDP has become so toxic that a
> >>> similar requirement may be necessary.
> >>>
> >>> Mike
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 at 04:58, lucilla fornaro
> >>> <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dear Mike,
> >>>
> >>> Let me understand your point of view.
> >>> So, agreeing with someone else means belonging to a “puppet
> >>> echo chamber” (which is an insult itself!)?
> >>>
> >>> You talk about respect and objectiveness when you are
> >>> insinuating the false and lacking respect for anyone who has
> >>> a different opinion from you.
> >>>
> >>> This is not a private talk at a coffee shop, you cannot cut
> >>> out from the conversation people who disagree with you. You
> >>> are accusing some members of pushing a proposal you disagree
> >>> with and according to you, this means we belong to a kind of
> >>> strange conspiracy gang. If I had a lot of free time I may
> >>> end up thinking you are doing exactly the same by rejecting
> it.
> >>>
> >>> Luckily, this is not a cult, this Afrinic and surprise
> >>> surprise, Afrinic is a welcoming open community where
> >>> DIFFERENT OPINIONS are not only accepted but encouraged.
> >>>
> >>> Members have been consistently asking for more time and once
> >>> they’ve received it they KEPT COMPLAINING because they now
> >>> want something else. So my question is, what game are you
> >>> playing? Because if there is something suspicious here, it
> >>> comes from you and those who are equally confused about what
> >>> they want. At least, my ideas are explicit.
> >>>
> >>> I think there are enough childish quarrels, if you are really
> >>> genuinely interested in Afrinic it is time to accept that
> >>> someone may disagree with you.
> >>>
> >>> regards,
> >>>
> >>> Lucilla
> >>>
> >>> Il giorno dom 18 ott 2020 alle ore 20:47 Mike Silber
> >>> <silber.mike at gmail.com <mailto:silber.mike at gmail.com>> ha
> >>> scritto:
> >>>
> >>> Lamiaa
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for confirming (yet again) to the list members
> >>> that you and several others seem to serve as an echo
> >>> chamber for each other and for little other purpose -
> >>> other than an attempt to manipulate the PDP.
> >>>
> >>> Objectively there was nothing offensive or constituting a
> >>> personal attack in what Fernando said and attempting to
> >>> amplify that lie is offensive to all of us who engage in
> >>> robust discussion on this list.
> >>>
> >>> As for your opinions on the appeal, frankly they are
> >>> irrelevant. Hopefully the appeal committee will be
> >>> objective and not manipulated by your echo chamber.
> >>>
> >>> While I appreciate the co-chairs extension of the last
> >>> call period, as others have pointed out, the extension
> >>> does not substantively change the decision against which
> >>> the appeal has been lodged.
> >>>
> >>> Mike
> >>>
> >>> Sitting back and waiting for the flames from the sock
> >>> puppet echo chamber
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 at 12:35, Lamiaa Chnayti
> >>> <lamiaachnayti at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:lamiaachnayti at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello Fernando,
> >>>
> >>> First of all, I would like to report to the chairs
> >>> your improper behaviour that consists of personally
> >>> attacking and offending Lucilla. This should be taken
> >>> seriously and shouldn’t go unnoticed so as to
> >>> maintain a fair and sensible discussion on the list.
> >>>
> >>> I would also like to point out that now that the
> >>> chairs have amended their decision, the appeal has
> >>> become invalid.
> >>>
> >>> Please start showing a little respect for what the
> >>> chairs are doing. Everything they voluntarily do is
> >>> for the sake of this community.
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Lamiaa
> >>>
> >>> Le dim. 18 oct. 2020 à 00:20, Fernando Frediani
> >>> <fhfrediani at gmail.com <mailto:fhfrediani at gmail.com>>
> >>> a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> Do not deceive yourself. There is an appeal
> >>> ongoing before any possible ratification.
> >>>
> >>> Fernando
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, 17 Oct 2020, 20:12 lucilla fornaro,
> >>> <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com
> >>> <mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> No, what I meant is that we’ve been
> >>> discussing for weeks, the end of the last
> >>> call has been already announced.
> >>> Co-chairs shouldn’t make any changes to that
> >>> decision. The policy shall now move to
> >>> ratification.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Lucilla
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> *Da:* dc at darwincosta.com
> >>> <mailto:dc at darwincosta.com>
> >>> <dc at darwincosta.com <mailto:dc at darwincosta.com
> >>
> >>> *Inviato:* domenica, ottobre 18, 2020 2:49 AM
> >>> *A:* lucilla fornaro
> >>> *Cc:* ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE; rpd List
> >>> *Oggetto:* Re: [rpd] Reversal of Consensus on
> >>> Resource Transfer Policy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 17 Oct 2020, at 19:36, lucilla fornaro
> >>>> <lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com
> >>>> <mailto:lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear Co-chair, dear community,
> >>>>
> >>>> I disagree with this extension of one week.
> >>>> I don’t see how this further week can do any
> >>>> good to a discussion that has already
> >>>> reached its purpose.
> >>>> It is clear that the community members have
> >>>> had exhaustive time to discuss the policy.
> >>>>
> >>>> The end of the last call for this policy has
> >>>> already been declared and we should keep
> >>>> moving forward from that.
> >>> I guess you meant send it back to discussion?
> >>> I have previously asked the Co-chair to share
> >>> with the community facts & figures on how
> >>> this proposal have reached consensus... Until
> >>> now, we have not seen nothing on this
> >>> regards...
> >>>
> >>> Luckily there is an appeal submitted.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Lucilla
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Darwin-.
> >>>
> >>>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> *Da:* ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE
> >>>> <oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng
> >>>> <mailto:oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng>>
> >>>> *Inviato:* domenica, ottobre 18, 2020 1:03 AM
> >>>> *A:* rpd List
> >>>> *Oggetto:* [rpd] Reversal of Consensus on
> >>>> Resource Transfer Policy
> >>>>
> >>>> Dear colleagues,
> >>>>
> >>>> Despite our belief 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.
> >>>>
> >>>> We, the co-chairs, have changed our decision
> >>>> and opt to extend the last call for one more
> >>>> week for prudence's sake.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you.
> >>>>
> >>>> Co-Chair
> >>>> PDWG
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng>, Weekly
> >>>> Bulletin
> >>>> <
> http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal
> >>>> <http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/>
> >>>> PGPortal <
> https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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 <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> >>> <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Lamiaa CHNAYTI
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 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 <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>
> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd <
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
> >> mje at posix.co.za <mailto:mje at posix.co.za> Tel: +27.826010496
> >> <tel:+27826010496>
> >> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA:
> >> https://ftth.posix.co.za <https://ftth.posix.co.za>
> >>
> >> Posix SystemsVCARD for MJ Elkins
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20201019/818754c5/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list