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

[Gaby Giner]

Dear community,

Taiwo's right. I still support Wijdane and Anthony in their bid for the
position.

Good day.

On Sat, Apr 10, 2021, 3:45 AM Uche Nwankwor, <ezigbonwankwor at gmail.com>
wrote:


> I have to say I agree with taiwo, as an organization we have been through

> alot and we are taking steps to correct them and do things right. An

> election needs to show fairness and everyone's voice being heard. We are

> looking forward to a new administration I'm very sure we do not want to

> start it off by saying some candidates were dropped. So in all fairness I

> say the two candidates  be allowed to run for the election

>

> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021, 8:25 PM Taiwo Oye <taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com> wrote:

>

>> Hi everyone.

>>

>> I am a bit confused as to where nomcom disqualified some candidates from

>> the election race.

>>

>> Is there a coalition trying to portray to the community that there are

>> only two candidates being considered for possible election?

>>

>> I have read all points trying to discredit the validity of the other

>> nominations. But I think it is only right to see if these candidates are

>> permitted to run for the election or not.

>>

>> Insisting on having a seconder is not stated anywhere in the CPM [1] and

>> also I believe that omination forms can only be submitted when all

>> compulsory fields (usually denoted by *) are filled.

>>

>> An election is deemed a success if everyone is given a fair chance. I am

>> in support of giving all candidates a voice as we await the final candidacy

>> list from NomCom.

>>

>> Kind regards.

>> Taiwo

>>

>> (1). https://www.google.com/amp/s/afrinic.net/policy/manual/amp

>>

>>

>>

>> On Apr 9, 2021, at 18:44, Sylvain Baya <abscoco at gmail.com> wrote:

>>

>> 

>> {try to move the faster possible/reasonable}

>> Dear PDWG,

>>

>>

>> ...as a resumé:

>>

>> <tl;dr>

>> i0| We have two valid candidacies : so nothing more to do.

>> They become simply the new PDWG's Chairs...if there is

>> no reasonable objection.

>>

>> i1| ...to keep a good stand, in trying to use only what our PDP

>> allows us to, we should/could just leave that problem for

>> the end of the shortest mandate. The rational of this simple

>> idea lies in the flexible structure of the PDP relatively to the

>> *selection* process. Then, at that time the PDWG could

>> choose to simply agree on a suitable selection method ; if

>> there are disagreement what should be important at end

>> could be to remain fair and transparent as a WG.

>>

>> i2| Could the candidates confirm their agreement?

>>

>> i3| When i2| is done, the PDWG should immediatelly install

>> their new Chairs...if i'm not wrong though :-/

>> </tl;dr>

>>

>> Le ven. 9 avr. 2021 à 13:46, Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za> a écrit :

>>

>>> Hi Daniel,

>>>

>>>

>> Hi Jaco,

>> ...brother, many thanks for proposing new and quite interesting

>> perspectives.

>>

>>

>>> Do note that I've actually made two distinct proposals.

>>>

>>> Firstly, that we accept Vincent and Darwin as the two replacement

>>> chairs.  I understand you're in agreement with this.  The question is

>>> who is for which period, of course, if we can't agree on this, then we

>>> can delegate that to the PPM as per below.

>>>

>>>

>> i see no need to do so :-/

>> ...the problem seems to not be too complex as the proposed

>> solution.

>>

>>

>>

>>> What you disagree with is the secondary proposal that we do this with an

>>> effective one year and two year term as of right now?  Or more

>>>

>>

>>

>> This disagreement has no real consequencies, within the actual

>> situation, because we have only two acceptable candidacies.

>>

>> ...there is a practice, enshrined [2] into the PDP, which could be

>> used to resolve the question of the term by leaving it between

>> the two caditates:

>>

>> ~°~

>> [...]

>> A *term* may begin or end no sooner than the first day of the

>> Public Policy Meeting and no later than the last day of the

>> Public Policy Meeting *as determined by the mutual agreement*

>> of the current Chair and the new Chair.

>> [...]

>> ~°~

>>

>>

>>

>>> precisely, you're warning that this could set a dangerous precedent for

>>> future in case we do recall our chairs again.  I cannot argue with that,

>>> but I must point out that I think the risk of that is fairly low.

>>>

>>>

>> ...apart the fact that there is already a DPP [*] which is trying to

>> better rule the PDWG Chairs Recall; i can add that, we should

>> only try to solve our problems step by step...

>> __

>> [*]: it still waiting for a "comming soon" IAR though

>> <https://afrinic.net/policy/proposals/2020-gen-007-d1>

>>

>> i0| We have two valid candidacies : so nothing more to do.

>> They become simply the new PDWG's Chairs...if there is

>> no reasonable objection.

>>

>> ...given that Frank has already reported that they have both

>> already agreed on the distribution of the terms of their

>> respectives mandates, could we conclude that all is OK?

>>

>> ...one thing remains, how to go further than the real

>> mandates of the Recalled PDWG's Chairs?

>>

>> What i propose is also quite simple:

>>

>> i1| ...to keep a good stand, in trying to use only what our PDP

>> allows us to, we should/could just leave that problem for

>> the end of the shortest mandate. The rational of this simple

>> idea lies in the flexible structure of the PDP relatively to the

>> *selection* process. Then, at that time the PDWG could

>> choose to simply agree on a suitable selection method ; if

>> there are disagreement what should be important at end

>> could be to remain fair and transparent as a WG.

>>

>> Please let's move forward on what we have already agreed on.

>>

>>

>> I do agree that the second proposal is strictly speaking a deviation

>>> from the process.  And this will contradict 3.3 of the CPM which

>>> (amongst others) state:

>>>

>>> "The PDWG Chairs are chosen by the AFRINIC community during the Public

>>> Policy Meeting and serve staggered two-year terms."

>>>

>>

>>

>> ...no!

>> There is not such constraint...PPM is ruled at CMP section 3.4.2 [1]

>> ...also you have to look at two differents scenari; enlightened below:

>> {*interim*} and {*temporary*}

>>

>> Please see below [2]:

>>

>> ~°~

>> 3.3  The Policy Development Working Group (PDWG)[...]

>>

>> {*interim*} If the Working Group Chair is unable to serve

>> his or her full term, the Working Group may select a

>> replacement to serve the remainder of the term.

>> {*temporary*} If the Working Group Chairs are unable

>> to attend the Public Policy Meeting, the Working Group

>> shall nominate a Chair for the session. Anyone present

>> at the meeting, whether in person or by remote participation,

>> may participate in the selection process for a temporary Chair.

>> ~°~

>>

>> ...see as a flexible PDP [1] is helping us; as it's quite simple

>> to solve most of our problems with no PDWG Chairs and quite

>> without violating our own binding rules :-)

>> __

>> [1]: CPM section 3.0 <https://afrinic.net/policy/manual#PDP>

>> [2]: CPM section 3.3 <https://afrinic.net/policy/manual#PDWG>

>>

>>

>>>

>>> I'm of the opinion though that with the consensus so far there are not

>>> any real objections to deviation from this process, obviously with the

>>> understanding that this is exceptional circumstances, and can thus be

>>> considered an emergency, as such, 3.6 of the CPM in my (not a lawyer)

>>> opinion is applicable.

>>>

>>

>>

>> ...no need to bypass the PDP in trying to use CPM section 3.6,

>> without PDWG's Chairs to enforce it!

>>

>>

>>>

>>> 1.  The decision to vary the process is taken by a Working Group Chair.

>>>

>>> [...]

>>>

>>> 2.  There must be an explanation about why the variance is needed.

>>>

>>> [...]

>>>

>>> 3.  The review period, including the Last Call, shall not be less than

>>> four weeks.

>>>

>>>

>> This is why the PDWG should be really grateful of the actual

>> outcome. Then accept it for what it is really: a very good

>> opportunity to rapidly move forward with gift of two months

>> to prepare the coming PPM...

>>

>>

>>

>>> [...]

>>>

>>> 4.  If there is consensus, the policy is approved and it must be

>>> presented at the next Public Policy Meeting.

>>>

>>>

>> There seems to be already a clear consensus on the PDWG's

>> (interim) Chairs and their respective terms.

>>

>> i2| Could the candidates confirm their agreement?

>>

>> i3| When i2| is done, the PDWG should immediatelly install

>> their new Chairs...if i'm not wrong though :-/

>>

>> The consensus is not needed on i1| right now; please could

>> we agree on i3|?

>>

>> ...so that the PDWG could become able to immediately start

>> to focus again on DPPs, with new Chairs to jauge the consensus.

>>

>> Thanks.

>>

>> Shalom,

>> --sb.

>>

>>

>>

>> [...]

>>>

>>> Kind Regards,

>>> Jaco

>>>

>>> On 2021/04/09 14:03, Daniel Yakmut via RPD wrote:

>>>

>>> > Inset

>>> >

>>> > On 09/04/2021 12:30 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:

>>> >> Hi Daniel,

>>> >>

>>> >>      >>>

>>> >>      >>>      [...]

>>>

>>

>>

>>

>> --

>>

>> Best Regards !

>> baya.sylvain [AT cmNOG DOT cm] |cmNOG's Structure

>> <https://www.cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure>|cmNOG's Surveys

>> <https://survey.cmnog.cm/>

>> Subscribe to the cmNOG's Mailing List

>> <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/>

>> __

>>

>>

>> *#‎LASAINTEBIBLE‬|‪#‎Romains15‬:33«*Que LE ‪#‎DIEU‬ de ‪#‎Paix‬ soit avec

>> vous tous! ‪#‎Amen‬!*»‪#‎MaPrière‬ est que tu naisses de nouveau.

>> #Chrétiennement‬«*Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi

>> mon âme soupire après TOI, ô DIEU!*» (#Psaumes42:2)*

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at afrinic.net

>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>>

> _______________________________________________

> RPD mailing list

> RPD at afrinic.net

> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210410/cd2ffeb0/attachment-0001.html>