[rpd] clarification on pending ratifications

[Noah]

Hi JORDI,

On Thu, Apr 8, 2021 at 12:52 PM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <
rpd at afrinic.net> wrote:


>

> Where I completely disagree with you is in the need for B.

>


I actually completely agree with Eddy on point B and I will explain why
using your own submission below...


>

>

> Following the PDP section 3.4.4 (approval):

>

> “The Working Group Chair(s) shall recommend the draft policy to the

> AFRINIC Board of Directors for approval if it has the consensus of the

> Policy Development Working Group.

>


Please read the above section again and you will understand why I have been
telling you over and over again that both policies did not reach consensus.

The section clearly states that the WG chairs shall recommend a draft
policy to the board for approval ..... only and I mean only, if the said
proposal has the "*consensus of the Policy Development Working Group*"

Now we all know what happened in the discussions, where the former
co-chairs went back and forth with rough consensus, consensus, no consensus
and them imposing some deadline for the WG to comment before they came
again with their declaration of consensus. This is not how consensus is
determined.

That is why section 3.4.4 of the CPM has the line that reads "*if it has
the consensus of the Policy Development Working Group*".

*Consensus is not the majority screaming I support I support and the
co-chairs also declaring, hey look, the majority are screaming I support I
support.... hey they are saying they need the policy so badly for AFRICA
blah blah blah ....so this is a done deal...we have obtained consensus,
hurray, hurray, hurray.... board please ratify now fast fast.....*

*RFC 7282* <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282>  *section 6* summarizes
that  "*One hundred people for and five people against might not be rough
consensus*".... until all objections have been addressed as explained in *RFC
7282* <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282> *section 3* and both the
Resource Transfer Proposal and Board Prerogatives Proposal... still have
unresolved concerns which is why a number of WG participants launched an
appeals to the Appeal Committee. Infact the Recall Committee also in their
report to the WG determined that the co-chairs failed after all "Consensus
is the path, not the destination". *RFC 7282*
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282> *section 5*


The recommendation shall include a report of the discussions of the draft

> policy and feedback from the Last Call.

>


That report needs to be shared with the PDWG because it's a summary
document of WG deliberation and it is the PDWG that determines Consensus
not the Co-chairs whose role is simply to declare the same only and only
when there are no valid objections and all concerns have been addressed.

The draft policy shall be ratified by the AFRINIC Board of Directors.”

>


Only if it has the consensus of the Policy Development Working Group.

Noah
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210408/f9b8b1f8/attachment.html>