[rpd] Selecting WG Co-Chairs: Was Re: Can a Consensual Decision of the PDWG Violate the PDP? (was: Report from Recall Committee)

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ]

Can we calm down for a minute?

 

There was a proposal for 4 options. Forget for a minute I leaded that effort. There was a much higher support form the community for choice 1 and I think only 2 people objected.

 

Now we have a bunch of people objecting to a new alternative with a criteria and telling ourselves that if a rought consensus selections doesn’t work (A), we will fall back to a ranked voting (B).

 

Do you think with the current discussion there is any chance of:
Reaching consensus in the criteria
and then
Reaching consensus on the selection
 

Also, how we will do the voting (B), what is the electoral census?

 

I think now it makes much more sense to reconsider the discussion that we had until yesterday and no need for any kind of “transition chairs”. If among the candidates we can convince some of them to withdraw, then we have the same result, but we avoid needing to reach consensus “a priory” on criteria, etc.

 

Just thinking loud.

 

I still will be happy with whatever decision we take in order to choose clearly neutral chairs.

 

 

El 19/2/21 15:35, "Fernando Frediani" <fhfrediani at gmail.com> escribió:

 

I really fail to understand this wish form some people to select someone for a role "by consensus".
This is not something good, practical (specially in a environment like we are) and that can easily leave doubts and distrust by many. I really wanted to understand why people believe so much in this type of exotic choice for persons for a role.
Look, choosing people is much different from move forward a proposal by consensus. It isn't the same thing, definitely is not !

In the situation we are who will determine there was a consensus or not about some person ? What if someone disagrees ? There is no current Co-Chairs to have the decision appealed as per the PDP.
Let's be practical as most places and vote or a show of hands as per last time having a electoral census of who can participate in this. Other than that isn't just something good or practical for most scenarios and may only contribute for this situation to remain as it is.

Fernando

On 19/02/2021 06:25, Sunday Folayan wrote:

In the light of MJE's contribution, I would like to modify my earlier submission.


My personal preference for Interim Chairs' selection: 

• [A] a selection through rough consensus [2] After prospects do volunteer; 
• [B] a selection based on ranking voting [3] if more than 2 volunteers, then discussions; 
• [C] a selection based on an election (online) as usual [1] if more than 2 candidates and discussions stalemate; 
• [D] a selection inside a group of selectees based on criteria [4] (a long and unnecessary process for selecting the interim Chairs); 
• [E] any other possibility? 

I have no problem with NOMCOM being the selectees in [D] above. It will not be a long and un-necessary process.

Sunday.

 

On 2/19/21 9:58 AM, Mark Elkins wrote:

Ask the NomCom to ask for volunteers. Just use the templates from 2020. Have an initial cut-off after seven days.

With last year, I was quite ecstatic when we ended up with just one volunteer. "Consensus" as such is great.

However, we technically need one person for three to six months and another for that same period plus one year. I'm wondering whether it might be more sane to extend both of these positions by one year? - or we simply consent to have the same people extended by an additional year each at whenever we have the next AFRINIC meeting?  Alternativly - we could be seen as simply bringing forwards the normal election of Co-Chairs to now(ish) - as we have an urgent need.

We also need to have a system on deciding who is in for a short term and who is in for a longer term. Voting may be the simplest method (as this will all be done remotely).

Any way - my thoughts.

On 2/19/21 9:55 AM, Sunday Folayan wrote:

Hello Sylvain 

On 2/18/21 11:48 PM, Sylvain Baya wrote: 


~°~ 
• a selection based on an election (online) as usual [1]; 
• a selection through rough consensus [2]; 
• a selection based on ranking voting [3]; 
• a selection inside a group of selectees based on criteria [4]; 
• any other possibility? 
~°~ 


My personal preference for Interim Chairs' selection: 

• a selection through rough consensus [2] After prospects do volunteer; 
• a selection based on ranking voting [3] if more than 2 volunteers, then discussions; 
• a selection based on an election (online) as usual [1] if more than 2 candidates and discussions stalemate; 
• a selection inside a group of selectees based on criteria [4] (a long and unnecessary process for selecting the interim Chairs); 
• any other possibility? 


Sunday. 

_______________________________________________ 
RPD mailing list 
RPD at afrinic.net 
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd 

-- 

Mark James ELKINS  -  Posix Systems - (South) Africa
mje at posix.co.za       Tel: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za




_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________ 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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210219/46dd9834/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6411 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210219/46dd9834/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2164 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210219/46dd9834/attachment-0001.png>