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

[rpd] Way forward as we approach AFRINIC-34 Public Policy Meeting.

Alève Mine info at
Sun Sep 19 14:11:15 UTC 2021

3) About Conflict resolution: consensus is a process that can be, and often
is, used to mute some of the voices and enable moral disengagement. If
consensus there must be, then no participant should be informed about
another's opinion before they give their own. And, in order to feel free to
talk, anonymity toward the group may be in question (whereby again I'm sure
our ingenuity will find a way to use this against ourselves) and a
mechanism for accountability must then still be found.

Footer that comes with every email, not specific to this message:
Please get my newsletter: enter your email address here.

On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 3:35 PM Alève Mine <info at> wrote:

> Dear PDWG, dear AFRINIC


> In response to your message, the below is part of an effort to face

> today’s challenges, here as they reflect on AFRINIC, while said challenges

> cover a lot more ground. Disclosing: I am an individual at the origin of

> the OneGoal Initiative for Governance which is

> based on insights gained from studying the Margin Problem

> It is while working on that that I landed in this

> thread. So, with regard to: Policy Development Process, PDWG Chairs

> (eligibility, selection & roles), and Conflict Resolution:



> 1.


> For all 3 questions: The introduction of mandatory disclosures for all

> participants in governance conversations in a way to fully grasp what a

> person wants to achieve and what they can or cannot do or say: much more

> extensive than what I’ve written above about myself. Live usability of this

> information in a way that is directly targeted at a person - with

> compassion - in conversations. If a person says they don’t agree with x

> because of y then we want anyone to be able to say x interferes with the

> interests of z on which that person depends. Indeed, if we pretend that

> these dependencies don’t impact the outcome, not only will the outcome be

> shaped by these dependencies in avoidable ways, but all participants will

> waste time, if not their life, discussing decoy arguments that are tools

> for promoting our underlying drives that are irrelevant to our actual

> problem.


> Dependencies listed will themselves have dependencies: an affiliation may

> have some of the same shareholders or founders as another organisation, and

> the expressed missions never quite fully or clearly disclose organisations’

> actions and intentions. A person may have allegiances, liabilities or own

> goals that are not written anywhere accessible. That a person or

> organisation has truly good intentions isn’t enough for them to act

> accordingly: they may have a liability, another entity may be pressuring

> them, holding them hostage with some type of argument, or just exercising

> authority of some kind over them, be it social or cultural. Therefore trust

> in a person’s intrinsic goodness isn’t enough. The person may also just

> believe that a powerful entity will give them favors protecting their

> future if they do one thing as opposed to another, although that presumably

> powerful party never promised any such thing, nor accurately figured out

> what is best for itself, for that sake. And a person may be an investor or

> executive in a company but there as a speculator or with an otherwise

> contrarian allegiance.


> This is by no means simple nor completely double-checkable, but we want to

> lay the foundations right in order to be able to build anything on top.



> 1.


> For eligibility, selection, roles: the allowable dependency structure

> of AFRINIC along the criteria of Keyness, Territory, Impact, Strategic

> motility and agility, and Management decision power listed in, albeit in

> the framework of startups,


> can be defined, and members screened accordingly. That said, the article

> doesn’t take into consideration all possible types of dependencies, so more

> thought needs to go into that. This also requires a constant awareness of

> updates in dependency structures of members.



> Unfortunately, as long as we, around the world, don’t identify our problem

> accurately, our own risks will rise and issues such as those discussed here

> will be the subject of an arms race (I’m sure our ingenuity will be

> squandered to come up with a way to use the above against ourselves, too),

> because the underlying exploitative drive, or belief that exploitation is

> to the advantage of the exploiter, that has many faces, including but not

> limited to arbitrage and any grabbing of power, also active internally in

> other regions and areas, is ill-informed. Therefore, information and

> meanwhile continued defense are needed.


> Best


> Alève



> ---

> Footer that comes with every email, not specific to this message:

> Please get my newsletter: enter your email address here.

> <>



> On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 7:23 AM PDWG Chair <dacostadarwin at>

> wrote:


>> Dear PDWG,


>> As at 4 August 2021, there are 8 Draft policy proposals under

>> discussion, of which 3 are technical policies and 5 are related to the PDP

>> (Section 3 of the CPM). Four of these 5 proposals expire before the

>> upcoming PPM scheduled for 15-18 Nov 2021, unless they are reviewed.


>> However, the Policy Development Working Group (PDWG) needs to bear in

>> mind that competing policy proposals will only increase the load on the PDP

>> and defeats the consensus basis well before any discussion happens on the

>> RPD mailing-list and at the Public Policy Meeting (PPM). We are also aware

>> of the Working Group’s calls for clear problem statements that authors

>> could then collaborate and draft solutions to. The PDWG is also divided as

>> to whether the CPM Section 3 needs to be reviewed with the submission of

>> multiple proposals or through one proposal.


>> Based on the foregoing, preparations for the upcoming Public Policy

>> Meeting which is scheduled for 15-19 November 2021 has to be kickstarted.


>> In regard to all the proposals aimed at updating AFRINIC’s Policy

>> Development Process , we invite the authors of the 5 proposals[1] to:



>> 1. Focus and come up with clear problem statements related to Section

>> 3 of the CPM,

>> 2. To ensure that the problem statements don’t overlap and thus the

>> need for the authors to collaborate,

>> 3. The problem statements to be shared with the PDWG for inputs and

>> refinements,

>> 4. Each group of authors to then come up with a draft policy proposal

>> that addresses their respective problem statement,

>> 5. The PDWG to objectively and constructively discuss the proposals

>> with the aim of improving the text, which should ultimately lead to a

>> better Policy Development Process.



>> The assessment of the draft policy proposals, excluding the "Board

>> Prerogatives on the PDP", was shared with the PDWG during the AFRINIC-33

>> PPM. To facilitate the way forward, the assessment has been updated to

>> include the “Board Prerogatives on the PDP”. It is available here:



>> Based on our assessment but subject to the PDWG’s and authors’ collective

>> agreement, we have identified the following problem areas which need to be

>> refined:



>> 1. Policy Development Process,

>> 2. PDWG Chairs (eligibility, selection & roles),

>> 3. Conflict Resolution.



>> Time is of utmost importance and the following timeline is being

>> proposed. It is however up to the PDWG to align with this proposal or

>> refine the timeline:



>> To facilitate the way forward, we request that the PDWG shares its views

>> and feedback on this proposal by 02 September 2021 at 23:59 UTC. AFRINIC

>> and the PDWG Chairs remain available to the PDWG and authors for support

>> (webinars for brainstorming, administrative support).


>> Warm Regards,

>> AFRINIC PDWG Co-Chairs.



>> Reference:


>> [1] - Co-chair Recall


>> Board Prerogatives on the PDP


>> Simple PDP Update for the new Normal -


>> PDP Working Group Guidelines and Procedures -


>> Chairs Election Process -


>> _______________________________________________

>> RPD mailing list

>> RPD at




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 5bda21db-a170-4138-a0ae-b6b336f248d7.JPG
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 126096 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list