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

[rpd] Eligibility Criteria for PDWG chairs

Fernando Frediani fhfrediani at
Sun Mar 28 18:36:54 UTC 2021

On 28/03/2021 15:23, Noah wrote:



> On Sun, 28 Mar 2021, 16:40 Wijdane Goubi, <wijdan.goubi at

> <mailto:wijdan.goubi at>> wrote:


> Regarding the point C, I find it hard to understand the need of

> having a candidate who must have at least 3 years of sufficient

> past and participative experience, which is first and foremost,

> unfair because being a member for 3 years in either AFRINIC or any

> other RIR does not make you necessarily an expert whereas there

> can be a candidate with less years of experience yet with better

> understating and expertise. That being said, the years of

> experience should be unconsidered when deciding whether the

> candidate is eligible or not.



> Years of active participation and interest in the PDP is everything

> otherwise we end up with co-chairs who "believe this and believe that"

> due to lack of active participation and following up discussions so as

> to make informed judgement.


> We don't want "believers" but rather folk who make an effort to

> objectively find consensus or rough consensus or lack of consensus

> from working group discussions and years of experience and

> participating ensures this.




> As for the point D, it is illogical as well, since it also

> categorize the candidates and privilege some of them, as there can

> be a candidate who have not participated in two AFRINIC events or

> more (face-to-face or virtual) in the past three years yet still

> have both a sufficient awareness and proficiency of the CPM as

> well as an adequate technical knowledge.


> Lack of participation should be a disqualification. There is no two

> ways around it and we should be honest with each other less we waste

> everyones time with potentially incompetent co-chairs.

Although I mentioned point D should not be a hard requirement in my view
as long the candidate meet all others, I  fully agree with the statement
to not waste everyone time with potentially incompetent co-chairs


> In any case, using the RPD list as a voter register is unacceptable

> for reasons such is pseudo accounts aka sock puppets and potential for

> ballot stuffing through multiple subscription like the 170 subscribers

> towards the co-chair elections in 2020 and who know how many more as

> of 2021.

Agree as well.



> Noah


> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at


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

More information about the RPD mailing list