[rpd] Community Feedback

Sat Dec 5 16:39:56 UTC 2020

Dear Wijdane,

I guess you are right. Everyone can pretty-well keep repeating their own 
lines, without seeking consensus, and chaos can continue to reign.

I got your point now.

Enjoy your weekend.

Sunday.

On 12/5/20 5:04 PM, Wijdane Goubi wrote:
> Dear Sunday,
>
> I would like to start by saying that the RPD is thankfully a free 
> democratic list where everyone is allowed and has the right to openly 
> share and freely express their opinions and nothing will ever stop me 
> from always giving my points of view in a detailed, straightforward 
> manner.
> As for the “we” pronounce, it was on behalf of some community members, 
> including me, who have mentioned that the CPM is not as clear as it 
> seems to be on its face and is way more complicated than it first 
> appears. Moreover, each member of the community might be approaching 
> things a little differently which can lead us to unreasonable 
> explanations and unnecessary opinions. Likewise, some sections of the 
> CPM have been explained from a certain perspective to align with 
> certain members interests and benefits and nothing can guarantee that 
> these assumptions are the true meaning of what was stated in the CPM, 
> as it can be interpreted and misinterpreted in so many ways.
>
> Regards,
> Wijdane.
>
> Le sam. 5 déc. 2020 à 10:26, Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at skannet.com 
> <mailto:sfolayan at skannet.com>> a écrit :
>
>     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
>     _______________________________________________
>     RPD mailing list
>     RPD at afrinic.net <mailto: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/20201205/40dba855/attachment.html>