Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Report from Recall Committee
JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
jordi.palet at consulintel.es
Thu Feb 11 10:34:54 UTC 2021
Hi Anthony, all,
With all the respect to your opinions, I will not respond to them in detail at this stage.
Please, all, if you don’t mind, pause other inputs or discussions until we finish our present decision to facilitate the work by now.
We like it or not, we agree or not, the Recall Committee decision is done and firm, so we need to focus the discussion on one of the choices for the way forward, and avoid other discussions.
El 10/2/21 22:21, "Anthony Ubah" <ubah.tonyiyke at gmail.com> escribió:
The recent events have proved that there are several confusing and unclear issues in the PDP which has led to a divided community, leaving members lost and the workgroup adrift.
I’d like to shed some light on the Recall committee’s recent report, which from my point of view requires more clarifications.
1: I couldn’t help but notice that the recall committee has failed many times during the report in specifying what has been exactly violated in the PDP.
2 : C4 is quite illogical since it is the co-chair's job to give a detailed report about which policies have reached consensus and which have not, and this is exactly what they have done. I believe the three Inter-RIR resource Transfer policies being in a competition is irrelevant to the community consensus (you can find the report referred to in this link: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2020/011372.html )
3 : C6 : The appeals number shouldn’t have mattered (especially since the majority of the appeal is filed by the same person for "God-knows-why"). Only the result should. And for now, two appeals have been dismissed, which proves that the Co-chairs' judgments and actions were fair and right. As mentioned, four of the appeals were filed by the same person. The only concerning thing in this situation is that the one person that has made all of the appeals couldn’t handle not passing all of his policies, and instead of working on improving them, has decided to appeal all of them at once. I feel the recall committee shouldn’t have given this statement and judgment without waiting for all of the results of the appeals. Making matter worse, the recall committee has acted prematurely pertaining to the matters in relation to the appeal.
4: Once again, the co-chairs have given a report explaining their reasons for declaring consensus or non-consensus on proposals discussed at AFRINIC32 by stating the objections and supporting arguments for each policy and the suggestions for improvement. So to sum things up, no specific violations have been stated from the recall committee to make a final decision on the co-chairs' recall, and the reasons stated are subjective and are not necessarily proof of misconduct.
5 : C.7 , C.8 , C12 What is the committee referring to by saying “violation of expected norm” repeatedly? The only violations that should be acknowledged are CPM and PDP violations. Situations differ from one meeting to another, and so should the co-chairs' reactions, based on the community’s demands and needs. Expected norms are not binding on the co-chairs, if the so-called expected norms are supposedly binding, this should have been stipulated under the CPM. This is not the case. This route taken by the Recall Committee is dangerous and the vague definition and proposed resolution will become a dangerous precedent moving forward! To date, we are left hanging to what is in actuality an “expected norm” here.
My 2 cents
_______________________________________________ RPD mailing list RPD at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD