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

[rpd] Policy Development Working Group co-Chairs selection

Daniel Yakmut yakmutd at
Mon Apr 12 16:04:50 UTC 2021

Dear Jordi.

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

> selection?


> 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.


> Regards,


> Jordi


> @jordipalet


> El 12/4/21 17:12, "Daniel Yakmut via RPD" <rpd at

> <mailto:rpd at>> 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.


> Simply,


> Daniel


> 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.


> Cheers,


> Noah


> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 1:32 PM Daniel Yakmut

> <yakmutd at <mailto:yakmutd at>> 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.


> Simply,


> Daniel


> On 11/04/2021 8:40 pm, Noah wrote:


> On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 6:19 PM Daniel Yakmut via RPD

> <rpd at <mailto:rpd at>> 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.


> Noah


> _______________________________________________ RPD mailing list

> RPD at



> **********************************************

> 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


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

More information about the RPD mailing list