Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Criteria for Eligibility or Selection of PDWG Co-Chairs
wijdan.goubi at gmail.com
Fri Feb 19 11:23:01 UTC 2021
Admittedly, one of the most critical ways that us as individuals can
influence the decision-making within the community is through voting, which
is a right and a formal expression of preference for a candidate for a
proposed resolution of an issue.
Hence, making a set of criteria for a WG participant to become a co-chair is
going to put obstacles and barriers in front of both voters and candidates.
Therefore, I absolutely don’t go along with the view of putting
restrictions on candidates no matter what hardships we went through during
the time of the previous co-chairs otherwise it might lead us to
misjudgments and discrimination.
Of course, that is one way of looking at it; however we are talking about a
voluntary position which simply should be for people who have a good
knowledge of CPM and PDP alongside with a sense of commitment, devotion,
and responsibility towards the community.
Le ven. 19 févr. 2021 à 06:52, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> a écrit :
> Hi PDWG participants,
> Could we as a WG participants agree on a set of criteria for a WG
> participant to become a co-chair.
> This I believe is more important and I had shared some few ideas below a
> separate thread but I think it would make sense to work this out on this
> new thread.
> Some thoughts that crossed my mind as criteria;
> 1. Active participation in WG discussions by a participant, in say, the
> past 3 years.
> 2. Participant should demonstrate a clear understanding of the CPM and
> especially sections that relate to the PDWG.
> 3. Participant should have some 5 years sound technical experience in this
> space with a clear understanding of Internet Protocol and preferably having
> worked in this space.
> 4. Affiliation with an entity which is am AFRINIC resource members could
> come in handy for a participant interested in chairing policy discussions.
> 5. Understanding of rfc7282 and what rough consensus and consensus is all
> about, after all consensus is a path and not a destination. This is very
> Other participants in this WG can also add and we see what criteria are
> more required and which ones to discard to keep it simple.
> I stand to be corrected but I think we as a WG have an obligation to first
> sort this requirements out before we can think of the selection of the
> interim co-chairs.
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD