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

[rpd] Call for interest for PDWG chairs closed & Way forward

Mike Silber silber.mike at
Fri Apr 9 09:51:34 UTC 2021

Hi Gaby

> On 9 Apr 2021, at 11:02, Gaby Giner <gabyginernetwork at> wrote:


> Hello all,


> Feel free to correct, but from what I could understand, Wijdane and Anthony didn't know that their nominator had problems,

I don’t know how you reached this conclusion?

There must have been some co-ordination between nominee and nominator, otherwise how would the nominee have provided their personal details, resume and picture? Given that we now understand that the nominator did not actually submit the nomination, there could not have been that co-ordination. So the nominee must have co-ordinated with someone other than the nominator.

Accordingly, I don’t understand how the nominees could reasonably have believed they were being nominated by the persons listed as the nominator?

> and then Paul had cleared it up after the date for nominations had expired

I don’t think Paul has cleared up anything and his explanation raises more questions than it clarifies.

> .. isn't it a bit unfair to disqualify them so immediately?

The lack of a valid nominator disqualified them - this WG is not disqualifying them.

> I mean, they were expecting that they are qualified (the seconder issue notwithstanding)

As above, I don’t see how you reach this conclusion.

The simple answer is in future one should approach people directly and don’t rely on “brokers” to facilitate a nomination. IMO use of a broker in this way is unethical and antithetical to an open and transparent process.


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

More information about the RPD mailing list