Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] Secretariat PDWG

Anthony Ubah ubah.tonyiyke at
Fri Feb 26 10:35:28 UTC 2021

Hello Marriam,

The is grossly subjective. I won't comment on your opinion about the former
co-chairs. However I want to comment on the election process, which in my
own opinion of the last one was a transparent and simple process, which
left no one dissatisfied.
Putting facts in, you cannot say an online election will always produce
candidates below par or inexperienced as you put it. The onus is on the
community to vote it candidates that th trust can deliver, and not the
opinion from a few.

Kind regards,


On Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 8:29 AM Mirriam <mirriamlauren at> wrote:

> Hi Anthony,


> Even WG consensus has been tried and tested as a great procedure in the

> past and you can ask Dewole, Sami, Seun etc.....


> As a WG, let us not shy away from the fact that in recent past two well

> meaning but inexperienced co-chairs who kept getting things very wrong got

> selected by voting. Don't get me wrong, voting by ranked choice may be good

> second option.


> The fall back to the board also sounds as a reasonable selection process

> with involvement of WG if board can float candidates.


> Mirriam


> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

> <>


> On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 1:46 AM, Anthony Ubah

> <ubah.tonyiyke at> wrote:

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list