[rpd] Community Feedback

[Ibeanusi Elvis]

Dear Gregorie, 

I would like to make some clarifications on your recent update and comment. Based on the link to the said email which infers that the co-chairs delayed the procedure for the proposal “AFRINIC Number Resources Transfer Policy Version 1.0”, the co-chairs just made an acknowledgement and notified the sender “Noah” that their is another similar proposal already in the last call stage and therefore judging by the time of the aforementioned proposal, the co-chairs began the process to request for an AFRINIC impact analysis on the proposal and to know how best to handle it along with the one already in the last call stage as entailed in 3.4.1 of the CPM “the WG Co-chairs(s) may request AFRINIC to provide an analysis (technical, financial, legal or other), of the impact of the draft proposal…”. 
Thus, there is no form of delay on the proposal rather they “the co-chairs” just outlined the situation of things. First, should the proposal that is already in the last call stage get passed and ratified, the one in the impact analysis stage will automatically dumped. Also, based on the the advice and analysis they got, they (co-chairs) suggested a meeting with the authors that will be mutually beneficial and aimed to get things on the same page. 

Additionally, regarding the the attacks on the faith, integrity and personality of the co-chairs like being referred to as an African Dictator, acting for personal benefits and interests when there are none; they too have the right to defend themselves. Likewise, there is no “keenness or excitement about making a decision to fast-track the new proposal” because first they can’t fast-track a new proposal it as stated in 3.3. “the PDWG Co-chairs only perform administrative functions” they cannot urge or facilitate a push to make a decision. They only made an acknowledgement. 

Regards, 
Elvis. 


> On Dec 5, 2020, at 18:24, Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com> wrote:

> 

> Well said Noah.

> 

> I sincerely hope that the Co-Chairs will take correction hence. I equally appeal to their unpaid advocates to see what the exact issues that need attention are, much more above any form of personal attacks that some people may deliberately launch, thereby masking the real issues.

> 

> We must now focus on issues and ignore those baseless distractions.

> 

> Co-Chairs are human, they have better learning algorithms than the best AI. Invoke it!

> 

> Sunday.

> 

> On 12/5/20 9:52 AM, Noah wrote:

>> 

>> 

>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2020, 07:38 ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE, <oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng <mailto:oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng>> wrote:

>> 

>> We thank you for your understanding, cooperation and the continued trust in us

>> 

>> On the contrary, the working group understanding,  cooperation and trust in the cochairs is only possible when cochairs dont undermine and disregard the WG rules of engagement (PDP) enshrined in the Afrinic CPM.

>> 

>> Not once but twice, the cochairs have attempted to selectively chose what policy proposal you wish to advance.

>> 

>> Whether its the controversial resources transfer proposal or now this new controversial recall proposal, its the disregard of the policy development process that makes members of this working group to fail to understand cooperate and trust in your efforts as cochairs.

>> 

>> By the way, there is nothing wrong with the recall proposal. However, its we the working group with the mandate to determine its fate through the policy development process. 

>> 

>> Which is;

>> 

>> 1. Authors submit a draft to the rpd list for consideration.

>> 2. Afrinic staff records it and publishes it with an ID.

>> 3. The working group then takes it time to discuss the draft proposal.

>> 4. In the next PPM, the draft proposal is then added to the PPM Agenda by cochairs.

>> 5. Its authors presents the proposal to the working group who would engage with the authors for more discussions and clarification etc.

>> 6.Afrinic staff would then also present their staff impact assessment and analysis.

>> 7. The cochairs would then based on all the above process determine if the draft proposal was attained rough consensus or not.

>> 8. If there is rough consensus then cochair would give the WG more time during last call for final discussions which may include editorial changes etc.

>> 9. Otherwise the draft proposal would have to go back to the WG list for futher discussion.

>> 10. The determination of whether the proposal needs a waiver of the working group cochair to invoke section 3.6 due to an emergency would come at this stage.

>> 

>> So you can clearly see that the policy development process has its timelines and its never rushed because AFRINIC above all, is affected by each and every action that is taken through the community bottom up process.

>> 

>> Therefore, when cochairs attempt to invoke section 3.6 while disregarding the above laid out process from 1 - 9 and rush to attempt to vary the process, is what makes the working group loose trust and fail to cooperate as you have seen with all the backlash from various members of this working group. 

>> 

>> You can indeed claim that there was a call by someone in the working group, requesting you to invoke section 3.6. Its indeed within that person right to request whatever they want. But its within your wisdom as cochair to know better and know the process and inform the said member that what they are requesting is impossible since the CPM is clear on how each new Draft Policy Proposal is treated as per the PDP.

>> 

>> I shall therefore reiterate that you give respect to the PDP process for once and fwiw there is no emergency here but what seems like serious confusion and/or lack of understanding in the part of the cochairs and the person who called for the process to be disregarded by cochairs. 

>> 

>> Whatever we do, always think AFRINIC at the back of your mind. We shall not compromise AFRINIC.

>> 

>> 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

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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20201205/c3803e41/attachment-0001.html>