[rpd] Community Feedback

[Mirriam]

 Hi Ibeanusi,

It's odd to claim that a number of people are emotional when they stand out to hold the leaders they elected accountable for their failures.

Since you continue to baselessly claim that people here have personal grievances and are emotional, please stand tall and spell out the so called grievances clearly.

I am waiting.

Mirriam

    On Wednesday, December 2, 2020, 3:48:14 PM GMT+3, Ibeanusi Elvis <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 Dear community, 
Adding to the ongoing discussion on this mailing list, besides the fact that this Request to Recall the PDWG Co-Chairs is based on personal grievances with the co-chairs and emotions, I don’t see a form of fast tracking this ongoing recall process and like the co-chairs stated, the so-called "promotion or fast-track” is of no benefit to them. They (the co-chairs) just performed their administrative function and in the principle of fairness, openness, and transparency, brought it forward to the RPD community for discussion. Likewise, the personal attack needs to stop, saying that the co-chairs are imitating the behavior of an “AFRICAN DICTATOR” whom wants to do everything they can to stay in power including adjusting the country’s constitution went too far and very disrespectful and an insult to their integrity and personality. Also, a disregard to the long hours and dedication that they have put into the service of this AFRINIC organization. 
Similarly, proposing a withdrawal of a draft policy proposal is not functional as the CPM 3.4.1 elucidates that first, "During the development of policy, draft versions of the document are made available for review and comment by publishing them on the AFRINIC website and posting them to the rpd at afrinic.net mailing list.”  which is currently happening. Also, the same CPM 3.4.1 states that "A draft policy expires after one calendar year unless it is approved by the AFRINIC Board of Directors as a policy. Hence, the idea of suggesting a withdrawal should end as well as the personal attacks. If you have an personal issues or grievances with the co-chairs, find a way to settle it with them. 
Regards, Elvis. 

I'm a stickler to rules and procedures and not interested or have a vested interest. Therefore consider my notes below as advisory to guide your decision as I do not want to argue for it against.
Aside from providing a context you have given in your earlier email, I must call your attention to this Latin word  “no one should be a judge in their own cause”. It is one of the cardinal rules of natural justice that no one should act as a judge a case in which they have a personal (vested) interest.  

Secondly, I wish to refer you to section 3.41. and  3.4.2. of the CPM as posted below before you invoke sections 3.6 which has lots of ambiguity which I have noted in my several correspondence on this mailing list. There  is legal standing of a section of a law or CMP needs to stand as procedures.
Let me try to clarify with a little LAW 101 classroom explanation based on the principle of antecedent law.  This simply means the Nature and Evolution of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. is a doctrine of interpretation where a court  interprets a qualifying clause to refer to the immediately preceding words or phrases.
In the light of the above, you must first satisfy the following in this order BEFORE YOU MAKE ANY CONCENSUS DECISION :
1: Publish on the website which has not been done or referred to in your email (See CMP section 3.4.1 for advice as seen below)2.  The draft policy shall be available for review for at least four weeks before the next Public Policy Meeting. 3: CONDITIONAL Statement but best practice before any meeting or consensus decision is made: The Working Group Chair(s) may request AFRINIC to provide an analysis (technical, financial, legal or other), of the impact of the draft policy proposal.4.  Each policy proposals must be place on an agenda for a PUBLIC MEETING. (This section must be satisfied before you proceed to interpret section 3.6)5. The agenda of the meeting shall be announced on the Resource Policy Discussion mailing list at least two weeks prior to the meeting. (Are we having another PPM before the end of this year?)

Please note that my comments are observations and advisory  to enrich out understanding of the CPM and it's interpretation. 

Regards
Caleb Ogundele



Extract of CPM Referenced
=============================================================================

3.4.1 Draft Policy Proposal

During the development of policy, draft versions of the document are made available for review and comment by publishing them on the AFRINIC website and posting them to the rpd at afrinic.net mailing list. Each draft policy is assigned a unique identifier by AFRINIC and the AFRINIC website shall also contain the version history and the status of all proposals.

The draft policy shall be available for review for at least four weeks before the next Public Policy Meeting. The author(s) shall make the necessary changes to the draft policy according to the feedback received. The Working Group Chair(s) may request AFRINIC to provide an analysis (technical, financial, legal or other), of the impact of the draft policy proposal.





3.4.2 Public Policy Meeting

The draft policy is placed on the agenda of an open public policy meeting. The agenda of the meeting shall be announced on the Resource Policy Discussion mailing list at least two weeks prior to the meeting. No change can be made to a draft policy within one week of the meeting. This is so that a stable version of the draft policy can be considered at the meeting. 

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Murungi Daniel <dmurungi at wia.co.tz> wrote:

+1



> On Dec 2, 2020, at 11:47 AM, Nishal Goburdhan <nishal at controlfreak.co.za> wrote:

> 

> On 2 Dec 2020, at 6:29, ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE wrote:

> 

>> Dear PDWG Members,

>> We want to acknowledge the proposal on Co-Chair Recall process

> 

> please pause.

> 

> consider that you are asking this WG if they want to fast track a proposal that you (the co-chairs and policy officer) have neither:

> #1 - disclosed to this working group;  sorry, but some random gmail account posting a proprietary binary to this list, is *NOT* a policy submission.  those of us that do not open attachments from random  strangers are waiting for the text version to be posted to this list (as is the norm)

> 

> #2 - given an identifier to yet

> 

> without even knowing the contents of the PDF, there are procedural steps involved in submission that you have not yet completed.  it’s entirely unclear to me how you expect people to assess the value of this proposal when they have not yet had a chance to read it.  and without assessing this value, it’s inconceivable that you would even consider fast tracking this.

> 

> please, stick to the process.

> 

> —n.

> 

> _______________________________________________

> 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



-- 
Ogundele Olumuyiwa Calebmuyiwacaleb at gmail.com234 - 8077377378234 - 07030777969_______________________________________________
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/20201202/cb620fdb/attachment-0001.html>