[rpd] way forward on the PDWG after the Recall of the co-chairs

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

To rephrase myself and avoid misinterpretations:

1) Even if the question was clearly placed in a single thread, some people was discussing in parallel in other threads. I tried to collect all the inputs anyway.
2) To avoid duplicating text, when somebody was providing some input, and then someone else supports that, I'm not stating again "a made this comment, b supported it also", so basically, next to the name of each participant you will see "what else" he/she was saying.
3) If someone was not clearly stating his choices, I needed to interpret them. Here I could have made a mistake, clearly, as now Owen seems to say that he will support 1 and 2, but in some text, he mentions that we should go on-line, so it seems that he is preferring 1 vs 2. He also didn't explicitly object to 3&4, so I didn't state so.
4) I tried to state objections only when they were clear and justified (valid), because that's what consensus means.
5) I believe that the summary clearly shows what happened in the discussion and overall, there is no any misinterpretation as complete overview. The report didn't try to say who said what in the conclusions part, but what the overall PDWG is saying.

Owen, if you still believe that the report is not a good overall summary, as we do in IETF, please "provide text".

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 18/2/21 9:32, "JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD" <rpd at afrinic.net> escribió:

    Hi Owen,

    I've based the summary of your inputs in several of your emails, mainly in https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/012252.html.

    I've inserted your comments in two places, as you discussed this in 2 different threads:

    Owen DeLong:
    Provided inputs to previous participants about non-enforceable points, following the PDP. Didn’t provided any preference, and NOT objected to any choice.	

    Owen DeLong
    Responding to Dewole Ajao, speaks about the ARIN AC and the co-Chairs model in the other RIRs. He suggests a ranked-choice voting, following the same as it has been presented as choice 1, and presenting detailed operational details for it.	1

    As you can see, you need to read them following the previous inputs. This way I avoided duplicating text.

    And yes, the report clearly indicates that existing co-chairs should be allowed to run, and also that you suggested to follow the PDP, which is option 1. May be my fault was not indicating also option 2, but note that you didn't responded to the choices suggested in my email, so I needed to interpret following *all* your emails. Sorry not being more precise on that interpretation.



    Regards,
    Jordi
    @jordipalet



    El 18/2/21 3:30, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> escribió:

        This is not an accurate reflection of my comments.

        I stated emphatically that the recalled co-chairs should be allowed to run.

        I also stated emphatically that we should follow the PDP and the PDP calls for the working group
        to elect co-chairs..

        Owen


        > On Feb 16, 2021, at 3:07 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:
        > 
        > Dear Board, all,
        > 
        > Following the February 10th email from the Board Chair, the PDWG has discussed the possible options on the way forward after the Recall of the PDWG co-chairs.
        > 
        > The attached document, already circulated today in the RPD, is a summary and conclusions of the discussions reached by the consensus of the PDWG.
        > 
        > The PDWG hasn't requested any change to the document in the last few hours, however it has been updated just to correct a couple of typos (track of changes show them).
        > 
        > As a consequence, the decision is:
        > 
        > "Halt everything regarding PDP decisions, until the board can organize on-line elections in a few weeks (with the previous electoral census)."
        > 
        > We should remark, as it has been suggested already by some participants in the discussion, that the ideal situation would be, once candidates are introduced to the PDWG, we have a constructive discussion in the list (and hopefully among the candidates) and some of the candidates withdraw, so an actual election process is no longer needed, as it already happened in the previous elections. Of course, this can't be guaranteed, so the elections process must be ready for that contingence.
        > 
        > We will await your decision about the timing and the call for candidates.
        > 
        > Regards,
        > Jordi
        > @jordipalet
        > 
        > 
        > 
        > 
        > 
        > **********************************************
        > IPv4 is over
        > Are you ready for the new Internet ?
        > 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.
        > 
        > <summary-of-way-forward-new-co-chairs-v2.pdf>_______________________________________________
        > RPD mailing list
        > RPD at afrinic.net
        > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd




    **********************************************
    IPv4 is over
    Are you ready for the new Internet ?
    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
    https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
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.