<div dir="auto">Hello Christian,<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I can understand how this could be a concern for you especially when/if the factors enumerated by Jackson is what we focus upon in our decision making.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">However I do not believe that is what Jackson is trying to say. As I understand it; it's more about "interaction ethics and norms", it's about ensuring that we communicate our points/views to as many as possible. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">That will happen when we put into consideration the <span style="color:rgb(128,0,128);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px"> "...different shades of skin color, languages</span><span style="color:rgb(128,0,128);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">, cultures and levels of exposure to our ecosystem,</span><span style="color:rgb(128,0,128);font-family:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">" </span> that exist within this community of ours. We are not all at the same level but in a bottom up process, we have equal rights in decision making hence we need to communicate with one another.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This is a message to us all and I urge us all to help engage one another constructively as we build a better community.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Regards<br>PS: My personal view<br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">Sent from my LG G4<br>Kindly excuse brevity and typos</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 6 Dec 2016 3:11 p.m., "Christopher Mwangi" <<a href="mailto:christopher.mwangi@liquidtelecom.com">christopher.mwangi@liquidtelecom.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div>"And when dealing with a community of different shades of skin color,<br>
languages, cultures and levels of exposure to our ecosystem, you need<br>
to be mindful that the way you argue, not the substance of your<br>
argument, is what mostly drives the point home"<br>
<br>
>>>this worries me, and I hope you are wrong. It means the community is willing to buy just about anything just because it is "presented" well. And that in my opinion is dangerous.
<br>
<br>
We must be willing to look beyond color, regionalism, personalities and attitudes and nature objectiveness all with the common goal of the good of the community.
<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Christopher
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="m_6748546656296828728x_divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Jackson Muthili <<a href="mailto:jacksonmuthi@gmail.com" target="_blank">jacksonmuthi@gmail.com</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, December 6, 2016 2:13:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Andrew Alston<br>
<b>Cc:</b> rpd<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [rpd] Inbound Policy</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
<font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt">
<div class="m_6748546656296828728PlainText">I before wrote here that I am always in principle siding with most of<br>
your arguments.<br>
<br>
It is the manner in which your arguments are put across that comes<br>
across as disrespectful and divisive.<br>
<br>
And when dealing with a community of different shades of skin color,<br>
languages, cultures and levels of exposure to our ecosystem, you need<br>
to be mindful that the way you argue, not the substance of your<br>
argument, is what mostly drives the point home.<br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Andrew Alston<br>
<<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com" target="_blank">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.<wbr>com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Jackson,<br>
><br>
> Let me now respond because I had a feeling that was coming, and I have<br>
> thought long and hard about how I would respond to that.<br>
><br>
> Firstly, I do not agree – the positions I have taken on this list – if you<br>
> go back and read – are always backed very carefully by substantiation,<br>
> numbers, figures, and yes, my own interpretation of the data. The fact is –<br>
> there are many that follow what I say because of that substantiation – and I<br>
> have always said to everyone – if you wish to argue a point with me, I<br>
> welcome the debate – but dispute the figures and the facts and the<br>
> substantiation of what I am saying, do not dispute the man. What I have done<br>
> is lobbied very hard for the positions I have taken on the lists where I am<br>
> present and a regular. People there may have seen the positions I have taken<br>
> and chosen to take those positions, but I have never, ever, gone out and<br>
> said, support this position without understanding it.<br>
><br>
> If you read the emails I have sent to various lists endorsing candidates –<br>
> or the emails I have sent endorsing policies – in every one I have said,<br>
> these are my positions, clearly explained – if you support them, vote that<br>
> way, if you don’t that’s ok – but still get out there and vote your<br>
> conscience. If you disagree with me – argue with me – but argue the facts.<br>
><br>
> That is not the same thing as regionalization and blind block support, it<br>
> just happens though that the people I have conversing to and lobbying for my<br>
> positions agree with the *substantiated* positions I have taken. Yes, I have<br>
> published figures openly that show the financial good standing positions of<br>
> various regions – its public data – it may not be pretty to read – but its<br>
> factual and it needs to be addressed. Yes, I have published data with<br>
> regards to the IP space in various parts of the continent – again, public<br>
> data, again, things that need to be considered and thought about. Yes, I<br>
> have published data about the allocation statistics as compared by country<br>
> and region, again, public data that needs to be discussed.<br>
><br>
> What I have not done – is advocated a position based on who wrote a policy,<br>
> where they are from, the language they speak, or any other such detail – and<br>
> I challenge anyone who disputes this to provide substantiated evidence.<br>
><br>
> What I have never done – is gone to the microphone to take a position<br>
> against a script that I did not understand – I have been able to argue with<br>
> and substantiate the position – even if people don’t agree with them – and I<br>
> have said to every person I have ever lobbied to support or not support to<br>
> take their positions from a position of understanding. I have explained my<br>
> views, and told them to read the policies and understand the positions they<br>
> are going to take.<br>
><br>
> I understand that when positions are taken sometimes those positions are<br>
> influenced by the view of a market from a perspective, we have very diverse<br>
> markets, we have very diverse points of view driven by the dynamics in those<br>
> markets, and I have no problem with that. What worries me though is when I<br>
> see people advocating positions that when questioned on, they cannot explain<br>
> their own position. I worry when I stand behind someone at the microphone<br>
> and they are holding a notebook and giving something to the author of a<br>
> policy, which is reading word for word from an email sent to him by the<br>
> author himself. I worry about the blatant politicization of policy as seen<br>
> by a large segment of the PDP community wearing shirts that make<br>
> inflammatory claims about their smooth transition to ipv6 being opposed –<br>
> which is an unsubstantiated accusation that is sensationalist at best.<br>
><br>
> I have long argued that in the board space, this is political – it’s an<br>
> election – there is politics involved. There is lobbying, there are<br>
> preferential candidate’s dependent on the view of the electorate, there is<br>
> gathering of support from regions of support – I get that – that’s politics<br>
> – it occurs worldwide and its part of any elective process (and I don’t have<br>
> an objection to it, let democracy reign).<br>
><br>
> However – once we walk into the policy forum, where policies affect all of<br>
> us, where a policy binds the whole community, I argue there that anyone who<br>
> wishes to argue a policy should be arguing from the perspective of the<br>
> policy and not the regional point of view, and arguing it from a holistic<br>
> perspective. That in my opinion is not happening. If people are going to<br>
> take a position, at the very least, take your own position from a position<br>
> on the policy itself – not the authors, not where the authors live, or the<br>
> language the policy was written in.<br>
><br>
> At this point – I am refraining from giving specific examples of the<br>
> behavior that I have seen – and I will continue to do so unless I have a<br>
> good reason to so – since I do not wish to turn this into another person on<br>
> person, finger pointing blaim game. I believe that myself, and every single<br>
> active person in this community at some point has been guilty of this to a<br>
> lesser or larger degree – and we need to deal with this in a holistic sense<br>
> – but we cannot deal with it unless we talk about it – so, in conclusion, I<br>
> never claimed to be perfect or not to have made mistakes, however, I do say,<br>
> we have to fix this. I will also say – the positions I have taken have been<br>
> substantiated – and its possible people may not agree with my interpretation<br>
> of the data, and that’s ok – but then lets argue the facts and the<br>
> interpretation – not the person.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Andrew<br>
><br>
> On 06/12/2016, 10:44, "Jackson Muthili" <<a href="mailto:jacksonmuthi@gmail.com" target="_blank">jacksonmuthi@gmail.com</a>> wrote,<br>
><br>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 6:34 AM, Andrew Alston<br>
> <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com" target="_blank">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.<wbr>com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> Hi David,<br>
>><br>
>> Firstly – I write what I say below in my own capacity – and PURELY my own<br>
>> capacity. What follows is not stated as fact – it is stated as<br>
>> observations<br>
>> and as it is stated as my own beliefs, which I hope are not accurate, and<br>
>> I<br>
>> am (extremely) open to being PROVED wrong.<br>
>><br>
>> You know – I watched that inbound transfer policy fail – and to be honest<br>
>> I<br>
>> expected as much – because let me say it like it is – I do not believe<br>
>> that<br>
>> the people who stood against the policy stood against the policy itself –<br>
>> I<br>
>> believe this was very much a case of what was described by Chris and Jan<br>
>> at<br>
>> the microphone at the end of the meeting. It seems to be stances are taken<br>
>> against the regions the policies come from or the people who author the<br>
>> policies. Until we fix the blatant regional splits in the policy process –<br>
>> we will not come right.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Indeed No conceivable explanation why such a proposal could fail apart<br>
> from above.<br>
><br>
> It seems to me that these regional splits were started by you Andrew.<br>
> And some of your actions tend to continue championing these splits<br>
> unfortunately.<br>
><br>
> You may need to be part of the effort to fix the issues you created.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>__<br>
> This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely<br>
> by Mimecast.<br>
> For more information please visit <a href="http://www.mimecast.com" target="_blank">http://www.mimecast.com</a><br>
> ______________________________<wbr>__<br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</div>
</span></font>
<br><br><span style="font-family:Arial;Font-size:10.0pt"> <hr width="100%"> This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast.<br> For more information please visit <a href="http://www.mimecast.com" target="_blank">http://www.mimecast.com</a> <hr width="100%"> </span></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>