Search RPD Archives
[rpd] APPEAL AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF CONSENSUS DECLARED BY THE POLICY LIAISON TEAM AND THE BOARD ON THE SELECTION OF PDWG CO-CHAIRS
sisoko daze
sisokodaze at gmail.com
Sat Apr 24 20:29:01 UTC 2021
Yup,
I agree. Just let the Appeal Committee do its part and let it have the
final say. No need to even quarrel about it.
But i think both sides need to tone down their taunts though(very
meaningless, the way i see it), or better yet, just stop the taunts
entirely.
Reek out.
On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 1:11 AM Tom Ochang <dontommy24 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I can clearly see that some new members lack knowledge of The code of
> conduct, and some old members have turned to e-bullies and have also
> negated the code of conduct to join the younger members in mudslinging.
> An appeal has been made let us wait for the AC to work and five their
> comment on the subject matter. Thank you.
>
> Tom Ochang
> Nigeria
>
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2021, 15:43 Taiwo Oye, <taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> AFRNIC never runs short of drama.
>>
>> - I think the appeal should be left with the committee than being debated
>> here.
>>
>> - I think a few people who think they are old members of the community
>> have a way of talking in an intimidating manner to scare off new members of
>> the community. They might be new but they are not “daft”.
>>
>> Noah can you kindly tune it down a bit. Sometimes it comes off as
>> bullying.
>>
>> - I think some new members have stepped out of line by their response to
>> the perceived attack on them. My advice is to keep to the african tradition
>> of respecting your elders. And try to tap from the relevant experience they
>> have to offer.
>>
>> - I think since an appeal has been presented against the chairs, the
>> cochairs need to stop acting in that capacity until the appeal is
>> concluded.
>> This was made clear and stated severally during the last appeal.
>>
>> I might be wrong in my opinions. But that is what “I think”
>>
>> Sisoko, can you kindly pass the popcorn.
>>
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Taiwo
>>
>> On Apr 24, 2021, at 13:50, Murungi Daniel via RPD <rpd at afrinic.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Emem,
>>
>>
>> Your arrogant and egotistical replies are proof of how childish and daft
>> you really are. Worse, you even lack the wisdom to realize that you are
>> displaying it full-on in public.
>>
>> News flash - there are people who will always be clever than you, know
>> more than you and be better than you in many aspects. Sadly you don’t seem
>> to have learned this life lesson. My advice to you would be to learn from
>> them.
>>
>> Regarding your appeal, it is a waste of everybody’s time but since it has
>> been lodged, am hopeful the appeal committee will see through the frivolous
>> attempts by you and those with like feathers to sow chaos and subvert the
>> proper working of the PDP.
>>
>> Check your self man - you seem to have the potential to be a solid
>> contributor to this community. Do not let your pride, self importance and
>> misguided attacks get in the way of that.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Murungi Daniel
>>
>>
>> On Apr 24, 2021, at 12:22 PM, Emem William <dwizard65 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Jaco,
>>
>> I will advise that you and your misguided cohorts refrain from
>> unnecessary rantings that is capable of heating up the mailing list.
>>
>> I submitted a request to the appeal committee; every rational fellow
>> should be able to wait patiently for the committee's decision without
>> trying to further complicate the issues on ground.
>>
>> One important thing that I sincerely want you to know is: *I have never
>> made the mistake of arguing with persons for who's opinions I have no
>> regards.*
>>
>> Have a nice weekend!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Emem William.
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 08:34 Jaco Kroon <jaco at uls.co.za> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Emem,
>>>
>>> Please keep your derogatory for yourself. Your other email was in my
>>> opinion also extremely out of line.
>>>
>>> I suggest you read the code of conduct and keep to that.
>>>
>>> My father has a saying he uses frequently, "the more things change, the
>>> more they stay the same", combined with an Afrikaans saying (I'm sure there
>>> are other variants in other languages) about "met grysheid kom wysheid" or
>>> directly translated "with grey (hair) comes wisdom" which is to say "with
>>> age comes wisdom".
>>>
>>> I agree the world is modern, and we need to adapt. But trust me, I
>>> consider myself a young person (mid 30s), tried and tested is good. The
>>> saying "nuwe besems vee skoon" or "new brooms sweep clean" certainly holds
>>> water (value), but the broom had to be invented first. Do not forget the
>>> journey that was taken to get where we are. Discount that and you're
>>> throwing the baby (good, new) out with the bath water (dirty, no longer
>>> usable).
>>>
>>> Please refer to my previous email, and if you can't deduce from that why
>>> consensus is the technically more correct and better approach compared to
>>> democracy _in_our_environment_, please re-read it a few more times, then
>>> sleep on it. I'm not so sure democracy is the father of
>>> multistakeholderism as you say, but I get why you're saying it - it's what
>>> we're all being indoctrinated with from a young age, and up to a point
>>> (meaning until you really sit and think about it, hard) it makes sense. I
>>> don't need you to agree with me, but I would ask that you try to understand
>>> and show some respect to your peers that came before you. I'm also very
>>> new (5 years) in this community, and I can tell you this: Those that have
>>> come before us certainly have some large shoes and broad shoulders. Show
>>> them the respect they deserve, please. They've been around the block a few
>>> times and better than any of us understand the pitfalls, and they have the
>>> experience to be able to provide guidance and vision. To build. To
>>> strengthen. So keep to your ideals, but learn from them.
>>>
>>> Now, instead of discussing philosophical politics and differences (not
>>> to say it's not important to understand these), can we please get back to
>>> discussing policy making? We are after all supposed to be the *Policy*
>>> *D*evelopment *W*orking *G*roup.
>>>
>>> Kind Regards,
>>> Jaco
>>>
>>> On 2021/04/23 21:08, Emem William wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Eddy,
>>>
>>> I would also like to suggest that you organise a webiner for some old
>>> folks on how to handle things in a multistakeholder environment. I see the
>>> need to enlighten them on the fact that a 'market' has many entrance. More
>>> importantly you need to educate them that there are new and better ways of
>>> doing things.
>>>
>>> They should not continue to live in thier old shadows because we are in
>>> a modern world where all animals are now becoming equal. They need not
>>> exhibit thier ignorance and think they can continue to dominate the others
>>> and label them 'new'.
>>>
>>> More importantly, you need to teach them that in a land where there are
>>> rules, the rules has to be followed; not an attempt circumvent the rules,
>>> by old folks to cheat the younger ones all in the name of "*being old*".
>>> It's not by age anymore. Probably Mark should suggest '*All animals
>>> are equal, Face or No face'.*
>>> This, I believe will restore the long lost sanity in AFRINIC.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Emem William
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2021, 17:34 Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Eddy and Chair
>>>>
>>>> Can AfriNIC perhaps through the Stakeholder Engagement department
>>>> increase its efforts on running quartely webinars for new members of our
>>>> community. I have been reading emails in recent weeks from folks who I
>>>> believe to be new members of the PDWG who could do with some capacity
>>>> building.
>>>>
>>>> This will go on to reduce the level of ignorance among the new members
>>>> of the community especially around the Policy Development Process.
>>>>
>>>> Some sort of orientation program similar to the one AfriNIC provides to
>>>> its fellows each year who attended physical meetings but instead run it
>>>> remotely via webinars.
>>>>
>>>> In my humble opinion.
>>>>
>>>> Noah
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2021, 16:26 Fernando Frediani, <fhfrediani at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Jaco
>>>>> Thanks for this excellent and necessary lesson.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every time I see the word democracy trying to be used in PDWG I feel
>>>>> the same lack of understanding by some.
>>>>> Some need to understand that just by a certain number of people
>>>>> voicing their wish for something isn't just enough to make something happen
>>>>> as things are not decided by a majority of voices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fernando
>>>>> On 23/04/2021 09:56, Jaco Kroon wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Okoye,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think you're confusing the concept of democracy and a consensus
>>>>> based approach.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a democracy, the majority (or largest individual sub group) get
>>>>> what they want, irrespective of whether it's right or wrong. The premise
>>>>> behind a democracy is two-fold: those that we appointed will action in the
>>>>> form of an autocracy that which they have pitched in their run-up (failure
>>>>> to do so generally leads to unrest, and even if they follow exactly that if
>>>>> it's not to the betterment of the larger group will at least be met with
>>>>> resistance by the minority), and will stick to exactly that and not become
>>>>> power hungry, and the larger believe is that the majority knows best and
>>>>> are right in their believes. Of course this is an
>>>>> idealogical/philosophical statement, for which there are many other
>>>>> wordings, the base premise is: the majority rules, right or wrong. A
>>>>> democracy only works if the elected leaders of the majority has the best
>>>>> interests of community as a whole at heart, otherwise it becomes an
>>>>> oppression of minority by the majority.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a consensus based approach, it's more strict, the majority cannot
>>>>> simply enforce their arbitrary will. But at the same time the minority can
>>>>> get their way. It's about addressing problems in such a way that the right
>>>>> thing will happen, irrespective of emotional influence and state of mind.
>>>>> In some cases we can delegate to a democratic based decision (ie, vote) *if
>>>>> we so choose*. As was the original proposal until I filed two motions:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. That we select two of the three eligible candididates (as per the
>>>>> criteria that the group have conceded to which eliminated the other three
>>>>> candidates, and AK based on the fact that he was the previously recalled
>>>>> chair). AK subsequently pulled out leaving us with only two eligible
>>>>> candidates, and based on no valid objections that was raised, they were
>>>>> then on the basis of consensus elected.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. That the appointments are made for one and two years respectively,
>>>>> but there were objections against this, so as I've got it this was
>>>>> accepted, but this could still potentially be changed at the PPM such that
>>>>> one term will end during the PPM and the other will run for a further year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Against the first item there were (as far as I could tell) no valid
>>>>> objections, just emotional outbursts, against the latter there were some
>>>>> "this is a variation of the accepted CPM" which could be deemed to be
>>>>> valid, and I also conceded that I've got no objection if this decision is
>>>>> postponed to the PPM, but it does make things more difficult for the newly
>>>>> elected chairs since their position going forward is unclear.
>>>>>
>>>>> My request is thus in short to not confuse a democracy with a
>>>>> consensus system(much more strict than a democracy since one person that
>>>>> raises a *valid* objection against a proposal can stop the thousand, in
>>>>> theory). But in the same sense, the thousand cannot stop the one unless
>>>>> they can raise a valid objection.
>>>>>
>>>>> The PDWG is not a democracy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kind Regards,
>>>>> Jaco
>>>>> On 2021/04/23 14:12, Okoye Somtochukwu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Community,
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion, I believe we should have a chance to appeal and contest
>>>>> the boards' decisions on the selection of co-chairs. A democratic
>>>>> government does not function when citizens are deprived of their right to
>>>>> free speech, protests tec. in the same vein, we should also have a say in
>>>>> appealing against the decision made by the board against the co-chairs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, The appeal against the board on the selection of the co-chairs
>>>>> is valid. Although it is only rational that we look into this issue and try
>>>>> to assess the situation as it is. This is because, although the board has
>>>>> acted in carrying out its duties and that of the co-chairs, I don't feel it
>>>>> is right for the board to have a consensus regarding the selection of the
>>>>> co-chairs.
>>>>>
>>>>> In all our doings, we must treat each other's duties and positions
>>>>> with the utmost respect and do our best to move the community forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 23, 2021, at 1:57, Paschal Ochang <pascosoft at gmail.com>
>>>>> <pascosoft at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello all.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's very simple. Has an appeal been lunched ? The answer is yes. So
>>>>> let the Appeal Committee do their job. It's simple.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, April 22, 2021, Haruna Umar Adoga <hartek66 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If we decide to proceed with the confirmation of the newly ‘selected’
>>>>>> Co-chairs, which some say were chosen based on a ‘consensus’ by the PDWG,
>>>>>> it will be a step in the wrong direction.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally do not subscribe to the idea of wasting the community’s
>>>>>> time on frivolous issues but an appeal has been made against the
>>>>>> confirmation of the Co-chairs and it needs to be addressed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We cannot and should not keep supporting this narrative as PDWG
>>>>>> members, that whenever someone or a group of persons question an
>>>>>> act/decision that needs clarification, we tend to push things under the
>>>>>> carpet intentionally by throwing all sorts of tantrums rather than facing
>>>>>> the issues in an upright manner.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Haruna.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 9:30 AM Arnaud AMELINA <amelnaud at gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the Spirit of Law, what is not authorised, is forbidden. Don't
>>>>>>> fool people here please. An other waist of time to the Community . The
>>>>>>> Co-chairs selection is over. Now we invite Co-chairs to take the place and
>>>>>>> start working, in order to avoid such kind of waist of time. Please, let
>>>>>>> move forward.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Arnaud
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le jeu. 22 avr. 2021 à 02:38, lucilla fornaro <
>>>>>>> lucillafornarosawamoto at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As we can all see, it is true that the CPM (3.5) openly mentions
>>>>>>>> the appeal against the co-chairs, but it doesn’t forbid other forms of
>>>>>>>> appeals. Furthermore, the appeal reports a serious matter that should be
>>>>>>>> properly investigated. This is the only way to go through it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In particular, I believe that the declaration of the consensus by
>>>>>>>> the Board of Directors goes beyond their authority.
>>>>>>>> Therefore, I support this appeal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lucilla
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Il giorno mer 21 apr 2021 alle ore 14:18 Emem William <
>>>>>>>> dwizard65 at gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Dear Appeal Committee,*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Please check the attachment for our appeal.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Subject : Appeal against the confirmation of consensus declared
>>>>>>>>> by the Policy Liaison Team and the Board on the selection of PDWG Co-chairs*
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear Appeal Committee,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am appealing against the confirmation of consensus declared by
>>>>>>>>> the AFRINIC team and the Board on the selection of PDWG Co-chairs, made on
>>>>>>>>> the RPD mailing list, on April 9th and April 11th.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013018.html)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013052.html)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I consider that the actions of the Board of Directors to
>>>>>>>>> self-declare consensus over the PDWG matter in selecting the new co-chairs
>>>>>>>>> is done outside of their scope of power and prerogatives.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Date of the appeal :* April 19th, 2021
>>>>>>>>> *Date of the decision made by the Policy Liaison Team*
>>>>>>>>> (1) 3rd April 2021
>>>>>>>>> (2) 9th April 2021
>>>>>>>>> *Date of the decision made by the Board of Directors*
>>>>>>>>> 11th April 2021
>>>>>>>>> *f) Reference to an announcement of decision which is being
>>>>>>>>> appealed*
>>>>>>>>> (1) 26th March 2021, Eligibility criteria imposed by Policy
>>>>>>>>> Liaison Team
>>>>>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/012768.html)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (2) 9th April 2021, Policy Liaison Team announced consensus is
>>>>>>>>> achieved
>>>>>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013018.html)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> (3) 11th April 2021, Board Chair declared consensus
>>>>>>>>> (https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/2021/013052.html)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Name and email address of complainant.*
>>>>>>>>> Emem William
>>>>>>>>> dwizard65 at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *Names of complainants.*
>>>>>>>>> 1. Olamide Andu (olamideandu at gmail.com)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. Yusuf Abdurahman Adebisi (adebc007 at gmail.com)
>>>>>>>>> 3. Emem Ekpo William (dwizard65 at gmail.com)
>>>>>>>>> 4. Sunday Ayuba (sundayayuba8 at gmail.com)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The following appeal addresses the “fake consensus on the
>>>>>>>>> selection of the co-chairs” declaration, which according to the CPM, cannot
>>>>>>>>> be done by anyone else besides the chair. Yes In this situation we agreed
>>>>>>>>> that AFRINIC team should serve as secretariat but this team went ahead to
>>>>>>>>> selectively implement decisions even when there was no consensus. The
>>>>>>>>> board’s interference with the matter signifies that the bottom up process
>>>>>>>>> no longer exists. Therefore, this appeal should serve the Appeal Committee
>>>>>>>>> in taking into account a very important point, which is the fact that the
>>>>>>>>> board has no right in declaring consensus.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Based on the Board’s action of declaring consensus on the
>>>>>>>>> selection of the co-chairs, which is done outside of their prerogatives, it
>>>>>>>>> is safe to conclude that the declaration of consensus is illegal as it is
>>>>>>>>> not within the prescribed power and prerogatives of the Board of Directors.
>>>>>>>>> The Board of Directors should have referred to and comply with the
>>>>>>>>> stipulated terms of the AFRINIC’s constitution and the CPM and ensure that
>>>>>>>>> any action that is taken by the Board of Directors is done consistently and
>>>>>>>>> in compliance with the stipulated terms of the AFRINIC’s Constitution and
>>>>>>>>> the CPM, which was not the case. The declaration of the consensus by the
>>>>>>>>> Board of Directors shows that the Board of Directors have acted above and
>>>>>>>>> beyond their prescribed power and prerogatives.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As for the list of requirements and qualifications imposed by the
>>>>>>>>> Policy Liaison Team, It is vital to note that they were never stipulated
>>>>>>>>> under the CPM. By simply adding on a list of requirement and qualification
>>>>>>>>> proves that the Policy Liaison Team have acted arbitrarily and with blatant
>>>>>>>>> disregard to the terms and procedures which are clearly stipulated under
>>>>>>>>> the CPM.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Based on the above, I urge the Appeal committee to look into this
>>>>>>>>> serious matter and resolve this appeal by standing with what is right.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thank you!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>> *Emem William*.
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Paschal.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://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
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RPD mailing listRPD at afrinic.nethttps://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
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20210425/766b65c5/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list