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

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

lucilla fornaro lucillafornarosawamoto at
Fri Apr 9 10:04:11 UTC 2021

Dear Community,

As far as I understood both Anthony and Wijdane had no clue there were some
issues related to their nomination. It is not their fault. If promptly
notified, they would have edited it before the nomination deadline.
I honestly don't understand why we should disqualify them for this. Once
notified, they have immediately solved the issue.
It is an open election, there is no need to be so strict about it. Not to
mention that it seems like we are restricting access to a limited number of
people, which is unfair and goes against the principle of openness and


Il giorno ven 9 apr 2021 alle ore 19:02 Mike Silber <silber.mike at>
ha scritto:

> Thanks Jaco


> Adbulkarim has since withdrawn his nomination.


> Accordingly we seem to have two valid candidates for co-chair.


> I have worked with Vincent previously and agree with the views expressed

> regarding his capabilities.


> I have not worked with Darwin, however I have been impressed with his

> clarity of thought and his civility on this list. I think that he can bring

> the fresh outlook some have been requesting - while working with a seasoned

> colleague.


> It seems to me that we have arrived at a consensus and I fully support

> Vincent and Darwin as co-chairs.


> I also support your proposal regarding term and tenure.


> Regards


> Mike



> On 8 Apr 2021, at 18:16, Jaco Kroon <jaco at> wrote:


> Hi All,


> Given that we've repeatedly stated that there should be a nominator and a

> seconder for all nominations, this means we only really received 3

> nominations (3,4,5 below).


> Given that Abulkarim (4) was one of the co-chairs removed by the recall

> committee, and there has been controversy around the previous co-chairs, in

> my opinion we only really have two candidates.


> And both of these candidates seems to be good choices. From Vincent's (3)

> nomination, by Barry:


> "Vincent is an outstanding person for the PDWG as he was the first

> co-chair of the same back in the days. we need to bring back the

> fundamental values and hence i nominate him"


> I could not agree more about bringing back the fundamentals, and plainly

> Vincent has experience in a co-chair position that we desperately need at

> this point in time.


> Regarding Darwin (5), I've gone back and read a fair number of his emails

> over the last year or so, and Darwin in my opinion has a level head, the

> ability to reason and understand as well. I could not find a single

> example of him being involved personally in a controversy in spite of him

> providing his opinion on a number of topics.


> I would thus like to make two proposals.


> 1. We select the two candidates as above, in my opinion with Vincent in

> the two-year tenure and Darwin in the one year tenure. By consensus if

> possible.


> 2. Given that the next meeting is two months from now, I would like to

> propose that we measure these tenures as from "this year" such that the

> effective tenures will be one and two years respectively from now, and not

> "puppet" and "one year" effectively.


> Kind Regards,

> Jaco

> O


> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at



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

More information about the RPD mailing list