Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Policy Development Working Group co-Chairs selection
yakmutd at googlemail.com
Mon Apr 12 16:04:50 UTC 2021
I am a man of reason. But, I don't appreciate being cajoled. I agree
that we could have, from onset agree that we are selecting new co-chairs
to start on a clean slate. I disagree with the statement that they are
completing a tenure and in the same vein mutating to start a new tenure.
If you will recall, for emphasis sake, I suggested that what we are
doing should be on a clean slate, however it was ignored. Surprisingly,
it was suddenly introduced after the selections was done. *That is my
My suggestion is that the Board and AfriNIC Secretariat should re-frame
their affirmation and summaries to capture that the PWDG had selected
two co-chairs on a consensus to start new tenure. This is on the
condition that the records shows that this was what actually transpired.
Adding to the learning: We must be consistent and implicit always with
our intentions and goals.
On 12/04/2021 4:31 pm, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
> From a realistic and practical standpoint, do you think it makes sense
> to have selected co-chairs for the next PPM and at the same time start
> a new selection, that takes a lot of resources, and makes difficult to
> keep discussing policy proposals in the list, which are much needed
> after the horrible decisions taken in the last two years?
> Just look at the number of policy proposals and how badly the lack of
> consensus decision for non-justified objections, ruined them. Even if
> you agree/disagree with those decisions, just read carefully the
> recall results, and read also the Appeal Committee minutes, and look
> to how two different of groups of people can clash in the
> interpretation of the PDP, including the point that the AC believes
> that the judgment needs to be done only which what happen in the
> meeting, while always we have been told that the list is part of the
> decision …
> Further to that, if there have been no other qualified candidates now,
> do you think they will magically appear in the next month, for a new
> Do you think that if some candidates clearly attempted to commit fraud
> (by themselves or whom brokered their nomination), should be allowed
> to participate as candidates again?
> What about the “new” increase in subscriptions to the list from the
> same residential IP addresses? How many folks in each household, you
> can believe to be participating with knowledge at the PDP discussions?
> I think there are sufficient arguments to ensure that there is at
> least 2 years of stability and healing, at least until we can define a
> better way to handle the elections and AFRINIC can ensure that 1
> participant is only 1 email and not being used as puppets.
> I’m sorry if this email can look as a bit “aggressive”, it not that my
> intent, I just want to be honest and crystal clear, as usually, but
> much more now, when the selection done by the PDWG is being discussed
> repeatedly every other hour.
> El 12/4/21 17:12, "Daniel Yakmut via RPD" <rpd at afrinic.net
> <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> escribió:
> Dear Noah,
> I am only saying we must be cautious at responding to each others
> opinions, without being seen to be arrogant about it.
> However, you will note my angst is against the fact we are extending
> the tenure of the Co-chairs midway. Clearly, the guidelines and
> timelines was specific that we were taken action to bring on board 2
> Co-chairs to *"complete the tenure of recalled co-chairs". *How do you
> explain the allocation/arrogation of one-year and two-year tenure when
> the new co-chairs emerged.
> If I will say, was there no deception? I am led to conclude that if
> the two selected persons were not the ones that made it to the end,
> tenure extension would not have been muted. For the records I will not
> support illegality.
> On 12/04/2021 2:49 pm, Noah wrote:
> Hi Daniel
> I have never presumed anyone is stupid. I am a Christian and no
> human created by the Almight God is stupid, but some can be
> foolish and have seen enough foolishness going on herein. Like
> your name sake Daniel submitted the other day, this is the RPD
> list and the PDWG and not Facebook or Twitter.
> Let us call a spade a spade and I will not bullshit around.....
> the selected co-Chairs can moderate me if I have crossed the line
> but we can't continue playing games and wasting each other's time
> as working group participants.
> We all agreed to the timelines the secretariat shared with this WG
> in terms of selecting new co-chairs, criteria were deliberated and
> we were all involved including some of the candidates that applied
> to be considered for the role.
> 1. Some candidates like Antony and Widjane were disqualified after
> their own nominators in their initial application declined the
> nomination. This is a serious concern imho because nominators must
> be folks known to a person. Those applications had motivations
> written, obviously not by the nominator but someone else therefore
> they are forgeries. A resource member then attempted to
> re-nominate both of them days past the deadline. Both ought to
> take some lessons and the needed experience going forward.
> 2. There was another nomination that the nominee declined, that
> is, our former co-chair Abdulkarim. The brother indicated that he
> would be very busy attending to other things in the coming days
> and months....hence dropped out of the race.
> 3. Then there was Elvis, who lacked a resource member to second
> his nomination. The brothers CV speaks louder as he literally
> lacks the experience and required technical knowledge based on his
> own CV to manage this PDWG. The PDWG and its PDP focus on Internet
> Number Resources policies and not liberal arts, language and
> political science. I refer you to his CV specifically the
> experience section.
> 4. In the past days and weeks, the PDWG across the board
> participated in selecting new co-Chairs in line with the timelines
> that the secretariat indicated, so that we can have managers
> to lead the PPM in the coming months. Considering 1., 2., and .3,
> above, most participants settled for Vincent and Darwin whose
> nominators and seconders are resource members and confirmed to
> have nominated and seconded them.
> You claim you are trying to correct misnomers, and among those
> corrections is to have the WG spend a great deal of its time with
> another co-Chair selection after the conclusion of an open,
> transparent selection process that has had this WG spend weeks
> working on acceptable criteria, guidelines, the nominations and
> eventually the consensus based selection process.
> I have listened to you and am suggesting that, If anything, we are
> all taking lessons and we shall improve the process through this
> very avenue of the PDP but let's stop with the nonsense.
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:32 PM Daniel Yakmut
> <yakmutd at googlemail.com <mailto:yakmutd at googlemail.com>> wrote:
> Dear Noah,
> You don't cease to amaze me, when you write or talk you
> presume everyone around you is stupid and you are the smart
> one. I can clearly see that you are too full of yourself and
> this make you write the way you do.
> Here we are trying to correct misnomers and you are busy
> writing gibberish. I don't waste people's time though I live
> in the AFRINIC REGION nor do I contradict myself in any form.
> However, when one has taken the course of being a Despot, he
> doesn't listen nor understand what others are saying.
> On 11/04/2021 8:40 pm, Noah wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 6:19 PM Daniel Yakmut via RPD
> <rpd at afrinic.net <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net>> wrote:
> For transparency sake
> What are you even talking about?
> and for posterity too, we must conduct another
> exercise to select/elect co-chairs.
> Of course with endless obsessions over co-Chair elections
> instead of focusing on Policy Development Work.
> I wouldn't mine if the exercise
> reproduce the same persons again.
> Are you even listening to yourself....I mean, If there is
> anything we do best in the AFRINIC region, it is to waste
> everyone's time with all sorts of contradictions and we
> are really good at that crap.
> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> The IPv6 Company
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged
> or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive
> use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty
> authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of
> this information, even if partially, including attached files, is
> strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you
> are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if
> partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be
> considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original
> sender to inform about this communication and delete it.
> RPD mailing list
> RPD at afrinic.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the RPD