[rpd] WE NEED YOUR INPUT, MAXIMUM BY TUESDAY 16TH NOON: Decision of way forward for new (transition or elected) co-chairs

[Arnaud AMELINA]

Le jeu. 11 févr. 2021 à 12:20, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> a écrit :


>

>

> On Feb 11, 2021, at 02:16 , Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za> wrote:

>

> I'll go with what Mike has said, that is - Option 1. I think a directive

> from the CEO & Chair is all that is needed and doesn't really need to wait

> a week for a full Board Meeting. It is on the shoulders of this community

> to fix the problem.

>

> I think we should only allow the same people that were eligible to vote

> last time - which would save time. I presume that list still exists.

>

> I'd like to see at least four people standing. I don't believe that the

> two ex-chairs should be allowed to stand (we are trying to change a bad

> situation). Personally, I'd like to see people standing that are resource

> owners - as they then have their own skin in the game - as such. No one

> with a policy in the current process chain should stand.

>

>

> I don’t think that they should be precluded from standing. While the

> recall was successful and I think that they are unlikely to receive a

> plurality of votes as a result, if the community votes to put them back

> into office, I see no reason that the community should be deprived of that

> option.

>

t'es pas sérieux là, Owen, tu veux dire que tout le travail que le RC a
fait serait inutile et que les même qu'ils viennent de démètre peuvent être
encore autorisés à compétir ?


> Most votes - person stands for remainder of two years,

> second most votes - stands for remainder of this current year.

>

> As Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com> <amelnaud at gmail.com> said on 24th

> Dec:

> > Is it normal that out of 2 cochairs, none is contact of a resource

> member?

> > Having a cochair who runs network and serves as contact (technical) of

> a  resource member is a big wish as previously discussed in this community.

>

>

> I don’t think it would be unreasonable to add this as an eligibility

> requirement through modification of the relevant PDP sections, but I don’t

> think we should be making it up on the fly without community discussion.

> There is a process for amending the eligibility requirements and we should

> follow it if we wish to do so.

>

> Owen

>

> !

>

>

> On 2/11/21 11:45 AM, Mike Silber wrote:

>

> Jaco +1

>

> Really humbling that a WG member from outside our region is the one trying

> to drive to consensus.

>

> Some comments inline.

>

> Mike

>

>

> On 11 Feb 2021, at 11:28, Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za> wrote:

>

> Hi Jordi,

>

> Thank you for your drive on this.

>

> On 2021/02/11 10:45, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:

>

> Hi all,

>

> Following the previous email, we have 4 choices for selecting the new

> co-chairs:

>

> 1. Halt everything regarding PDP decisions, until the board can organize

> on-line elections in a few weeks (with the previous electoral census).

>

>

> Agree with 1.

>

>

> Pros for (1) / Cons against (2):

>     - quicker turn around for (1)

>     - we don't know when feasible we would be able to arrange for (2)

>

> Cons against (1) / Pros for (2)

>     - Easier to generate bogus votes for (1).

>

> Agreed

>

>

>

> 3. Ask the board to choose 2 transition co-chairs, so we can have

> elections in the future (option 2 above).

> 4. Nominate ourselves a few names for transition co-chairs and let the

> board to decide among them, once they confirm their willingness to take the

> job, so we can have elections in the future (option 2 above).

>

>

>

> Personally I don't really think that (3) and (4) are two distinct

> options, more like we should try to get recommendations / nominees to

> the board as per 4, and then give the board prerogative to select the

> candidates (even from non-nominees if none of the nominees have the

> required background / skills / suitability, obviously with motivations).

>

> Agreed. I like the option of 4 + 3 if we can get some rough consensus on

> this list of some nominees. Particularly if (1) takes some time.

>

>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

> --

>

> Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa

> mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.826010496 <+27826010496>

> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za

>

> <abessive_logo.jpg><QR-MJElkins.png>

> _______________________________________________

> 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

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210211/c9ee6eec/attachment.html>