[rpd] Policy Development Working Group co-Chairs selection

[lucilla fornaro]

Hello Jordi,

The unprecedented situation regarding the absence of co-chairs that we have found ourselves into required an immediate election to be able to fill out the vacant positions in order to continue the work of the PDWG. Regardless of one’s opinion/preference for which candidate, we have solved the emergency to keep going. Logically, the new co-chairs should only serve the remaining term of the recalled co-chairs. Plus, I don’t see any waste of resources with the current circumstances. On the contrary, face to face meetings are now virtual, costs are reduced and Afrinic has surely saved a LOT.

As for the AC and RC reports, I’d have to agree with you on the fact that there was an obvious contradiction that has been pointed out several times in this mailing list, but which has been ignored, along with the board’s interference with the AC by the sudden unjustified resignations, mid-stopping the appeals and violations. This issue still remains unaddressed and must be brought up again.

Also, I am very disappointed at how each day a new member of this list expresses his support for a non inclusive environment. Following your logic, why do we bother and why does the world in general bother to have any elections ? You can’t predict who will and who won’t be participating. It’s really time to stop deviating the core value and essence that this community has been based on the very first day it has been created.

As for the continuous suspicions and one person one vote issue, several solutions have been pointed out in this list and yet, none have been implemented. What is the point of the staff bringing out these problems each time if no actions are made to stop them? And didn’t we have an entire discussion on how the elections will use a platform allowing only one person to vote? What happened to that? These elections were discriminating, rushed and completely planned to serve ulterior motives. It is sad what the PDWG has come to.

Lucilla
________________________________
Da: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
Inviato: martedì, aprile 13, 2021 12:31 AM
A: rpd List
Oggetto: Re: [rpd] Policy Development Working Group co-Chairs selection

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 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.



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 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.

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 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.

Noah
_______________________________________________ RPD mailing list RPD at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd

**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
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.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20210413/43b50f4e/attachment-0001.html>