<div dir="auto">Hi Dear all, <div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I hope you are fine.</div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Dewole mail is so clear and helpful for all of us the organisation must move forward. Discussion must be for promoting paper submission and innovation in our area of interest. </span><span style="font-size:12.8px;font-family:sans-serif">Let stay one team, one goal for Africa advancement.</span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:12.8px;font-family:sans-serif"><br></span></div><div dir="auto"><span style="font-size:12.8px;font-family:sans-serif">Grace Mupoyi</span></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le ven. 31 mai 2019 à 10:19, <<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Send RPD mailing list submissions to<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd-request@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd-request@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:rpd-owner@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd-owner@afrinic.net</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of RPD digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Re: Cooperation re PDP update proposal (Dewole Ajao)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 10:17:54 +0100<br>
From: Dewole Ajao <<a href="mailto:dewole@forum.org.ng" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">dewole@forum.org.ng</a>><br>
To: JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>, "rpd >> AfriNIC<br>
Resource Policy" <<a href="mailto:rpd@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">rpd@afrinic.net</a>>, Komi Elitcha<br>
<<a href="mailto:kmw.elitcha@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kmw.elitcha@gmail.com</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Cooperation re PDP update proposal<br>
Message-ID: <<a href="mailto:5f58a263-a8e9-5f3e-5c68-7acb86454ba2@forum.org.ng" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">5f58a263-a8e9-5f3e-5c68-7acb86454ba2@forum.org.ng</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; Format="flowed"<br>
<br>
Thanks for the contributions, guys. Please can we try to leave out the <br>
past failings and stick to the policy discussion proper? Whenever we go <br>
back to past issues of failing to respond to email and stuff, we take <br>
away from the current discussion; discussion is happening and we thank <br>
the contributors for that. Let's stay focused, please.<br>
<br>
Dewole.<br>
<br>
On 5/31/2019 9:26 AM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD wrote:<br>
><br>
> Hi Komi,<br>
><br>
> El 31/5/19 10:08, "Komi Elitcha" <<a href="mailto:kmw.elitcha@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kmw.elitcha@gmail.com</a> <br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:kmw.elitcha@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">kmw.elitcha@gmail.com</a>>> escribi?:<br>
><br>
> Hello Jordi,<br>
><br>
> You ?still don't see the contradiction? ?Please review what you wrote.<br>
><br>
> I did, and again, I don?t see the issue. I will love if someone can <br>
> clarify what I?m missing.<br>
><br>
> A non native english speaker should go for an easy English and be less <br>
> pedantic.<br>
><br>
> When you aren?t native, you tend to write following the writing style <br>
> for your own language. This is not easy to avoid.<br>
><br>
> There are many other non english speakers like you, struggling over <br>
> there ?to understand and contribute. This ?is another strong <br>
> motivation for a good moderation ( organise the discussions, make <br>
> sure, people use easy english, provide ?regular summary of <br>
> discussions...) so that everyone has the same understanding and do not <br>
> fall under individual ?interpretation of the language....)<br>
><br>
> This is asking too much from the chairs. They can?t interpret each <br>
> message and clarify to the rest of the community in their own ?writing <br>
> styles?. Is simply impossible. Even more this is not done in any other <br>
> region, neither in the IETF. Maximum chairs do in **one** specific WG <br>
> in IETF (v6ops), is, when there are several documents under <br>
> discussion, they send a **single** message to the list asking the <br>
> people to read and comment about one document every week. I can tell <br>
> you that even that is not working, people read the documents if they <br>
> wish and when they can. No sense to change in the PDP chairs functions <br>
> for that, in my opinion is an impossible micro-management.<br>
><br>
> PDP key principles: ?bottom-up, ?inclusiveness, openness and <br>
> transparency ?is well known and no moderation shall ?go against them.<br>
><br>
> Moderation's definition of PDP-BIS can be found in the PDP document <br>
> through chairs actions at each stage of proposal ?lifecycle, and in <br>
> the ?working group operation guidelines which conforms to BCP25 <br>
> definition.<br>
><br>
> On your last point, coauthors ?of PDP-BIS ?have answered ?all your <br>
> ?mails, including the November's one you referred to, ?even ?those not <br>
> all mails require response.<br>
><br>
> This is not true, even before Dakar, there is at least one message <br>
> that was not responded, and what one of the co-authors told me in the <br>
> Dakar meeting was ?I?m not reading the mailing list?. This is <br>
> something I can?t expect from proposal authors.<br>
><br>
> HTH<br>
><br>
> Komi<br>
><br>
><br>
> Le 25 mai 2019 ? 19:24, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <br>
> <<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>> a ?crit?:<br>
><br>
> Hi Arnaud,<br>
><br>
> El 25/5/19 14:57, "Arnaud AMELINA" <<a href="mailto:amelnaud@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">amelnaud@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:amelnaud@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">amelnaud@gmail.com</a>>> escribi?:<br>
><br>
> Hi Jordi<br>
><br>
> Le?mer. 22 mai 2019 ??13:50, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ<br>
> <<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jordi.palet@consulintel.es" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">jordi.palet@consulintel.es</a>>> a<br>
> ?crit?:<br>
><br>
> Hi Komi, all,<br>
><br>
><br>
> ? ? Many got lost and confused easily in the unmoderated? flow<br>
> of mails.<br>
><br>
> Big disagreement here. A PDP, by definition is an open and NOT<br>
> MODERATED PROCESS AT ALL. It must be dynamic, and if some<br>
> people don't participate, is not good, but that should not<br>
> preclude the moderation of those that actually participate.<br>
><br>
> Can we be more serious in these discussions about the PDP with<br>
> less contradictions and inconsistencies?<br>
> What argument are you really? making? with the statement above?<br>
><br>
><br>
> I don?t see the contradiction here, unless I said something<br>
> broken, not being native English. What I?m saying is that the PDP<br>
> and the corresponding list MUST NOT be moderated at all. I will<br>
> love everyone participating, and that must be the goal. A more<br>
> complex PDP process doesn?t facilitate an increase of<br>
> participation. Whatever we do MUST NOT add difficulties or<br>
> complexities to those that already participate, or we may lose them.<br>
><br>
><br>
> PDP is? not an IGF,? but an open, transparent decision making?<br>
> forum with a clear process.<br>
><br>
> The AFRINIC? PDP? uses a Working Group as it is expected to study,<br>
> discuss,?? design and implement through policies, solutions for a<br>
> proper management of the INRs in the service region.<br>
> And such working group? requires appropriate moderation.<br>
><br>
> Moderation of? a working group? mailing list must be understood?<br>
> as defined in BCP25, section 6.1<br>
> ***<br>
> ?Moderate the WG email list<br>
><br>
> The Chair should attempt to ensure that the discussions on the<br>
> list are relevant and that they converge to consensus agreements.<br>
> The Chair should make sure that discussions on the list are<br>
> summarized and that the outcome is well documented (to avoid<br>
> repetition). ...........<br>
> ***<br>
><br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
> I?m sorry but I disagree with the term ?moderation? used in BCP25<br>
> for the PDP.<br>
><br>
> When you say ?moderation? **unless** you explicitly CITE BCP25,<br>
> section 6.1, 99% of the community will understand a different<br>
> thing. I believe also that you aren?t reading correctly BCP25 for<br>
> two reasons:<br>
><br>
> 1)The IETF process is only ?on-list?.<br>
><br>
> 2)The IETF usage of moderation is subjected to other timing,<br>
> possible virtual meetings, etc.<br>
><br>
> I agree that the chairs should make sure that the discussions are<br>
> on topic and polite, and I think that?s not what the people<br>
> usually understands as moderation. Moderate a list is to allow<br>
> each email to be sent or not to the list, in the context that it<br>
> was said by Komi ?Many got lost and confused easily in the<br>
> unmoderated flow of mails?.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Please, realize that if I send an email to a given policy<br>
> authors in November, it should not be needed that I resend the<br>
> email 6 months after to get responses. If you volunteer to<br>
> author a proposal, you commit to advance it according to the<br>
> community discussion and respond timely to emails. This is not<br>
> necessarily true for community participants, they can decide<br>
> NOT to respond to authors emails.<br>
><br>
> [...]<br>
><br>
><br>
> Of course, but both things are compatible. I usually don't<br>
> expect that a 1st version of a policy proposal is right, but<br>
> if you don't keep improving it along new version, it will not<br>
> happen.<br>
><br>
> ? ? ><br>
> ? ? >? ? ? Please, lead this process to conclusion.<br>
> ? ? ><br>
> ? ? >? ? ? Thank you.<br>
> ? ? ><br>
> ? ? >? ? ? On behalf of PDP-BIS Authors<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Arnaud<br>
><br>
><br>
> **********************************************<br>
> IPv4 is over<br>
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
> <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
> The IPv6 Company<br>
><br>
> This electronic message contains information which may be<br>
> privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for<br>
> the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further<br>
> non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use<br>
> of the contents of this information, even if partially, including<br>
> attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a<br>
> criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware<br>
> that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents<br>
> of this information, even if partially, including attached files,<br>
> is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so<br>
> you must reply to the original sender to inform about this<br>
> communication and delete it.<br>
><br>
><br>
> **********************************************<br>
> IPv4 is over<br>
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?<br>
> <a href="http://www.theipv6company.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.theipv6company.com</a><br>
> The IPv6 Company<br>
><br>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged <br>
> or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive <br>
> use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty <br>
> authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of <br>
> this information, even if partially, including attached files, is <br>
> strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you <br>
> are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, <br>
> distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if <br>
> partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be <br>
> considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original <br>
> sender to inform about this communication and delete it.<br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> RPD mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190531/004eccd4/attachment.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20190531/004eccd4/attachment.html</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
RPD mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">RPD@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of RPD Digest, Vol 152, Issue 72<br>
************************************<br>
</blockquote></div>