[rpd] Community Feedback

Wed Dec 2 20:54:43 UTC 2020

Hi Lucilla,

Please clarify the emergency here?  Will a war break out if this policy
doesn't get changed sooner than the normal process?  Will someone die? 
What's the emergency here?

Kind Regards,
Jaco

On 2020/12/02 15:22, lucilla fornaro wrote:

> Dear Community,
>
> Section 3.6 of the CPM says: “The process outlined in this document
> may vary in the case of an emergency. Variance is for use when a
> one-time waiving of some provision of this document is required”.  
> The author should not withdraw this important proposal for two
> reasons: firstly, it is valuable, and secondly, if not approved it
> will automatically expire. 
> I believe this is exactly the moment for the chairs to change the
> process of the PDP, considering that we do find in the case of an
> emergency.
>
>
> Regards Lucilla 
>
> Il giorno mer 2 dic 2020 alle ore 21:48 Ibeanusi Elvis
> <ibeanusielvis at gmail.com <mailto:ibeanusielvis at gmail.com>> ha scritto:
>
>     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
>     <mailto: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
>>     <mailto: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 <mailto:dmurungi at wia.co.tz>> wrote:
>>
>>         +1
>>
>>
>>         > On Dec 2, 2020, at 11:47 AM, Nishal Goburdhan
>>         <nishal at controlfreak.co.za
>>         <mailto: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 <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>
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     *Ogundele Olumuyiwa Caleb*
>>     /*muyiwacaleb at gmail.com <mailto:muyiwacaleb at gmail.com>*/
>>     /*234 - 8077377378*/
>>     /*234 - 07030777969*/
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20201202/4cf820cc/attachment.html>