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

[Fernando Frediani]

Folks, we must have a criteria.

It is always beautiful to welcome anyone without any limits but it puts 
it has the potential do put the whole thing is serious danger.
There must be always a mechanism that doesn't allow anyone to vote 
straight away "just for being there", otherwise it opens doors to anyone 
willing to manipulate de process. Isn't already enough the hundreds of 
subscriptions there was in the last prior the last process ? Isn't that 
obvious there is a risk in there ?

The important thing to have in mind is that having these mechanisms to 
limit those who can participate at any election process DOES NOT limit 
any new people to participate in the discussions at any time. The 
interest from newer people should not be to be able to vote straight 
away, but to contribute. The right to decide will come as something 
natural later on.

Regards
Fernando

On 20/02/2021 05:54, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:

>

> Hi Owen,

>

> Very valid point and I agree, but I think there is a clear need to 

> make that crystal clear in the PDP in the future.

>

> We know that there is a lot of subscribers that also don’t come to 

> meetings, so they can’t “participate”. Even more, many subscribers 

> that are puppets or attempts to manipulate in case of elections. Just 

> look at the previous spike right after the elections were announced. I 

> think we all agreed that this must be avoided.

>

> Regards,

>

> Jordi

>

> @jordipalet

>

> El 20/2/21 8:36, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com 

> <mailto:owen at delong.com>> escribió:

>

> I think that is a dangerous interpretation… Even though someone may 

> not have posted directly on the

>

> list or spoken at the microphone, they may have engaged in hallway 

> discussions and private email

>

> exchanges with others who participate actively.

>

> In fact, some organizations require that only one person speak with 

> the public voice, but that does

>

> not mean that the other people from the organization who have 

> influenced that one voice did not

>

> participate.

>

> Owen

>

>

>

>     On Feb 19, 2021, at 1:57 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD

>     <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:

>

>     Passive RPD list subscribers, in my opinion, as I already

>     indicated in the summary, has a solution:

>

>     as per Section 3.3:

>

>     “Anyone may participate via the Internet or in person. PDWG work

>     is carried out through the Resource Policy Discussion mailing list

>     (rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>) and the bi-annual

>     AFRINIC Public Policy Meetings (PPM). Any person, participating

>     either in person or remotely, is considered to be part of the

>     Policy Development Working Group.”

>

>     There may be some exceptions to the closure of the electoral

>     census, if we consider this part of the text “Any

>     person,*participating*”. The PDP is not clear about if registered

>     participants who are not participating actively (in discussions in

>     the RPD or having participated in the mic of the previous

>     meeting), is actually considered to be part of the PDWG. The

>     actual text could be perfectly understood as “if you haven’t

>     participated in discussions, showing your opinions, you’re still

>     not a validated full member”. This could also help to avoid what

>     we can name as “bogus voters” and at the same time, facilitate

>     that if any new real person has joined to the RPD and participated

>     in the discussions after the previous electoral census closure,

>     can justify as well his/her inclusion in the electoral census.

>

>     El 19/2/21 10:28, "Noah" <noah at neo.co.tz <mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>>

>     escribió:

>

>

>     Hi Mark,

>

>     On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 12:05 PM Mark Elkins <mje at posix.co.za

>     <mailto:mje at posix.co.za>> wrote:

>

>         Ask the NomCom to ask for volunteers. Just use the templates

>         from 2020. Have an initial cut-off after seven days.

>

>     The template could do with some new fresh ideas reference to

>     criteria ....imho

>

>         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).

>

>     Since the PDWG and its participants operate by participation, we

>     should also give a chance to rough consensus/consensus after all

>     voting itself is not defined in the CPM though it has been a

>     practice in recent years.

>

>     Btw, the rpd list has subscribers who passive and are not

>     necessarily participating in PDWG discussions. What do we think of

>     this?

>

>     Noah

>

>     _______________________________________________ RPD mailing

>     listRPD at afrinic.net

>     <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>     <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>

>

>

>     **********************************************

>     IPv4 is over

>     Are you ready for the new Internet ?

>     http://www.theipv6company.com <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 <mailto:RPD at afrinic.net>

>     https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>     <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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210220/3d4d16dd/attachment-0001.html>