[rpd] Reversal of Consensus on Resource Transfer Policy

[Blaise Fyama]

Tout compte fait j'ose croire que la prolongation de la part des
co-présidents est une bonne chose et est une mesure statutaire et sage qui
fait avancer les choses. Cela dit je soutiens la prolongation pour un
meilleur consensus et que le débat contradictoire nous illumine
suffisamment sur la question.
Le rejet pour le rejet pourrait ne pas être sage, pour arriver à un
consensus une modération des positions respectives des uns et des autres
s'impose!

Cordialement,
                     Blaise FYAMA
Msc, PhD.
Professeur Associé
Secrétaire Général Académique Honoraire/UL
Doyen de la Faculté des Sciences Informatiques/UPL
Doyen a.i de la Faculté Polytechnique/UPL
Chef de Département Génie Electrique/ESI-UNILU
Chef de Service Informatique/Polytech-UNILU
Consultant Informatique BIT/PAEJK
Membre de International Research Conference IRC/WASET
Tel: +243995579515
Numéro O.N.I.CIV: 00460

MSc, PhD.

Associate Professor

Honorary Academic Secretary General / UL

Dean of the Faculty of Computer Science / UPL

Dean a.i of the Polytechnic Faculty / UPL

Head of Department of Electrical Engineering / ESI-UNILU

IT Service Manager / Polytech-UNILU

IT Consultant BIT / PAEJK

Member of International Research Conference IRC/WASET

Phone: +243995579515

O.N.I.CIV number: 00460


Le lun. 19 oct. 2020 à 17:08, Daniel Yakmut via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> a
écrit :


> I am pleasantly surprise that the Co-chairs have extended the last call on

> the Resource Transfer Policy. This is laudable, I want to support this

> action. It clearly shows that the Co-chairs have a listening ear and ready

> to guide PDWG to achieve consensus on this very important policy.

>

> I hope we achieve some milestone with this extension, this of course is

> without prejudice to an appeal, which is unnecessary.

>

> Simply

> Daniel

>

>

> On Oct 18, 2020 5:52 PM, "Frank Habicht" <geier at geier.ne.tz> wrote:

>

>> Hi,

>>

>> On 18/10/2020 11:49, ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE wrote:

>> > Dear Gregoire,

>> > Please note that we have gone through your appeal and we are not in any

>> > way afraid of your appeal.

>> > Please feel free to even appeal this reversal.  We took this decision

>> > based on what the community has asked us to do.

>>

>> Just to clarify:

>> I believe many community members requested the policy proposal to

>> not_go_into_last-call and to not_be_considered_consensus-achieved.

>>

>> That means the intention of these voices is to get the policy back to

>> mailing-list discussion, and the intention is not to extend the

>> last-call period.

>>

>> That is at least my position.

>>

>> I acknowledge that here are lots of voices on this list who argue the

>> opposite, for the policy proposal to get approved by chairs (and as such

>> the WG) and to go to board ratification.

>> There's an appeal against that.

>>

>> Also I would like to note that in my understanding some of the voices

>> wanting the proposal to proceed do advocate to not follow PDWG

>> processes. Surely without bad intent. And I could be wrong. I know some

>> already know that I am.

>>

>> Regards,

>> Frank

>>

>> > We are here to listen to

>> > the genuine need of the community while following the CPM correctly and

>> > to the best of our ability to avoid anarchy.

>> >   We have consistently asked you to categorically point out ANY section

>> > of the CPM we have breached. Up till today and for weeks now you only

>> > kept on saying *we Co-chairs have breached the CPM without ANY proof *to

>> > back it up only the fact that we have refused to dance to your personal

>> > tune. We have a lot of respect for you just like we do for every member

>> > of the community but please respect yourself so that you can be a good

>> > example to the generation behind you.

>> > You asked us to follow the precedence from previous Chairs, we did by

>> > following your advice. Only for you to now start singing another song or

>> > have you forgotten s*o quickly that chairs in the past have had reasons

>> > to change their decisions?*. Oh is it because we refuse to dance to your

>> > personal tune that you decided to circulate falsehood about the

>> > breach of the CPM on the mailing list?

>> > Ordinarily, we would have ignored your noise, but sometimes if we don't

>> > tell the truth. falsehood can be regarded as the truth.

>> > *Please point out clearly any Section of the CPM we have breached*.

>> > thanks

>> > Co-Chair

>> > PDWG

>> >

>> >

>> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 9:32 PM Gregoire EHOUMI

>> > <gregoire.ehoumi at yahoo.fr <mailto:gregoire.ehoumi at yahoo.fr>> wrote:

>> >

>> >     Dear co-chairs,

>> >

>> >     You create a lot of confusion and you don't follow the PDP. Which

>> >     section of the PDP allows extension of the last call after you have

>> >     ended it ?

>> >

>> >     You also seem to ignore that according to appeal ToR section 5.1.e,

>> >     a failure​ ​to​ ​respond​ ​to​ ​or​ ​conclude​ ​discussions​ ​within

>> >     ​ ​one​ ​week​ ​of​ ​a​ ​request​ ​from​ ​a complainant​ ​by​ ​the​

>> >     ​Chair(s)​ ​shall​ ​be​ ​considered​ ​sufficient​ ​grounds​ ​under​

>> >     ​sections​ ​5.1(c) and​ ​5.1(d).

>> >     So your decision made on the 7th October was challenged as from 8th

>> >     October. You did not conclude satisfactorily to the requests from

>> >     the complainants within the following week. So the appeal filed on

>> >     the 15th is valid as your decision stands and can’t be reversed.

>> >

>> >     Please stop this continuous violation of the rules on which AFRINIC

>> >     operates.

>> >

>> >     Failure to obey should be considered as perjury.

>> >

>> >     Regards,

>> >     --

>> >     Gregoire

>> >

>> >>     On Oct 17, 2020, at 12:02 PM, ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE

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

>> >>     wrote:

>> >>

>> >>     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>

>> >

>> >

>> > 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

>> > 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/c62ee8f1/attachment-0001.html>