[rpd] PDWG situation without co-chairs

[Dewole Ajao]

Actually there is no king in the PDP, fortunately or unfortunately. 
Hopefully though, the market will be coordinated as best possible using 
the untested rules we have to work with in this case.

My take:

PDP (section 3.5) says a co-chair may be recalled (with request and 
justification sent to the board of directors); Logically, the recall 
process ends in either recall of the co-chair or continuation of his/her 
term. That's all that the conflict resolution section states and as such 
we will have to go to another part of the PDP that makes mention of a 
truncated co-chair term.

The applicable section (i.e. 3.3) says the Working Group may select a 
replacement to serve the remainder of the term. Given the current 
polarized state of this working group, perhaps Afrinic staff under the 
guidance of the CEO and some advisory from the Board (being the 
representatives of resource members) could convene an online meeting in 
which the working group properly analyzes the situation and chooses a 
path forward?

Considering our current fear of room stacking ahead of either face to 
face and online polls, it would be interesting to see how we resolve 
this one. Is this the birth of a PDWG led by a small group rather than 2 
individuals? A group given a mandate to somehow tidy up many of the 
flaws in the current PDP?

Regards,

Dewole who quickly runs off to get a flame retardant suit :-P

On 2/9/2021 7:17 AM, Daniel Yakmut via RPD wrote:

>

> I don't agree Fernando, a committee does not usually have that 

> 'absoluteness' you mentioned. I can also understand the remarks 

> 'Findings/Outcome of the Recall Committee' to mean that there is a 

> hanging process.

>

> Please, the committee's outcome remains that the Co-Chairs should be 

> recalled. There must be a pronouncement from the board that 

> constituted the Recall committee. This is not a market square so we 

> cannot take the 'shout of a mad man in the market to mean the 

> proclamation of the king'. The king must speak through the authorised 

> channel, before the people can accept.

>

> Therefore, we wait!

>

> Simply

>

> Daniel

>

>

> On 09/02/2021 3:18 am, Badru Ntege wrote:

>>

>> I believe this is the correct understanding of the outcome.

>>

>> We now need to move forward with the selection of new co-chairs.

>>

>> The community is committed to accept the outcome of the committee.

>>

>> Lets move on.

>>

>> Regards.

>>

>> *From: *Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani at gmail.com>

>> *Date: *Tuesday, 9 February 2021 at 01:45

>> *To: *"rpd >> AfriNIC Resource Policy" <rpd at afrinic.net>

>> *Subject: *Re: [rpd] PDWG situation without co-chairs

>>

>> 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 interim.

>>

>> That's it.

>>

>> Fernando

>>

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

>> <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> 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 ?

>>     > http://www.theipv6company.com <http://www.theipv6company.com>

>>     > 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 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

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

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


-- 
Regards,

Dewole.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210209/612bc8ee/attachment-0001.html>