Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] PDWG situation without co-chairs

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at
Mon Feb 8 22:48:15 UTC 2021

No Daniel, the output of the Recall Committee regarding the Co-Chairs is
already final (read point 19 from their report) according to whats the CPM
says about it, so it does not have to be approved by anyone, not even the
Board itself.

So currently we don't have any Co-Chairs.

What the Committee has mentioned in the document is for the Board to lead
the election of the new Co-Chairs and determine the transition during this

That's it.


On Mon, 8 Feb 2021, 19:29 Daniel Yakmut via RPD, <rpd at> wrote:

> Here we are indeed in a strange situation, which we created for

> ourselves. A situation we were drumming for. I thought we all had it

> figured out and that is why we called for recall of the Co-chairs.


> I am baffled that Jordi is already making a suggestion on how to proceed

> to get new Co-Chairs. When the recommendations of the Recall Committee

> has not being assented to. Though, I don't know who is to approve the

> recommendations of the committee.


> Hence, the response of Jordi is not tenable here, since I have not seen

> any declaration that, we don't have co-chairs. I am aware that the Alan

> Barret led committee made recommendations, which requires acceptance,

> approval and implementation.


> I am rather seeing a strange situation in the haste that is being

> suggested on how to deal with the 'situation of no Co-chairs'.


> I am currently studying the documents provided by the Recall Committee,

> to enable one make an appropriate comment. But, at this early stages the

> outcome of the committees report remains just recommendations.



> Simply,


> Daniel




> On 08/02/2021 9:52 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:

> > Hi all,

> >

> > We are in a very strange situation now.

> >

> > We have no co-chairs, we have no meetings (because the Covid) so

> elections could take place.

> >

> > The Recall Committee suggested that the section 3.3 of the CPM shall

> take effect (if the working group chair is unable to serve his or her full

> term the WG may select a replacement to serve the remainder of the term).

> >

> > The Recall Committee report already suggested that the PDWG should work

> on this and coordinate with the board.

> >

> > Guys, this is our "problem" as a community. Remember that the board is

> only helping the community here organizing the elections.

> >

> > Is not the board who choose the candidates and elects them it is our

> tasks. Remember that without co-chairs, we can't advance with our work. Who

> takes care of ensuring a profitable discussion in the list for any policy

> proposal (and we have many in the table), or even ensuring that there is

> not any abuse or bad behavior during this period?

> >

> > I will like to propose a few ideas and I hope that others also do the

> same. Remember that this is transition period:

> >

> > 1) Ask the board to choose among previous co-chairs that already have

> proven experience (and hopefully they accept).

> > 2) Nominate ourselves those previous co-chairs.

> > 3) A combination of both 1 and 2 above (example, board nominates one,

> the community another).

> > 4) Instead of looking for a temporary replacement, asking the board to

> organize elections in a maximum of 4-6 weeks, using the same procedure that

> was prepared for the last time and using the same electoral census.

> >

> > If we want to board to hear us and take a decision, we should try to

> reach consensus *among us* without co-chairs. I know it seems difficult,

> but I'm convinced that at difficult times, this community will be able to

> work together.

> >

> > Eddy, I will love to hear also what you have to say, or if the board

> already has worked out something, etc.

> >

> > Thanks in advance!

> > 

> > Regards,

> > Jordi

> > @jordipalet

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > **********************************************

> > IPv4 is over

> > Are you ready for the new Internet ?

> >

> > The IPv6 Company

> >

> > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or

> confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of

> the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized

> disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this

> information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly

> prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the

> intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or

> use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including

> attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal

> offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this

> communication and delete it.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > RPD mailing list

> > RPD at

> >


> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list