<div dir="ltr">Dear Sunday,<div><br>I would like to start by saying that the RPD is thankfully a free democratic list where everyone is allowed and has the right to openly share and freely express their opinions and nothing will ever stop me from always giving my points of view in a detailed, straightforward manner. <br>As for the “we” pronounce, it was on behalf of some community members, including me, who have mentioned that the CPM is not as clear as it seems to be on its face and is way more complicated than it first appears. Moreover, each member of the community might be approaching things a little differently which can lead us to unreasonable explanations and unnecessary opinions. Likewise, some sections of the CPM have been explained from a certain perspective to align with certain members interests and benefits and nothing can guarantee that these assumptions are the true meaning of what was stated in the CPM, as it can be interpreted and misinterpreted in so many ways.</div><div><br>Regards,<br>Wijdane.<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le sam. 5 déc. 2020 à 10:26, Sunday Folayan <<a href="mailto:sfolayan@skannet.com">sfolayan@skannet.com</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Well said Noah.</p>
<p>I sincerely hope that the Co-Chairs will take correction hence. I
equally appeal to their unpaid advocates to see what the exact
issues that need attention are, much more above any form of
personal attacks that some people may deliberately launch, thereby
masking the real issues.<br>
</p>
<p>We must now focus on issues and ignore those baseless
distractions.<br>
</p>
<p>Co-Chairs are human, they have better learning algorithms than
the best AI. Invoke it!<br>
</p>
<p>Sunday.<br>
</p>
<div>On 12/5/20 9:52 AM, Noah wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, 2 Dec 2020, 07:38
ABDULKARIM OLOYEDE, <<a href="mailto:oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">oloyede.aa@unilorin.edu.ng</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">We thank
you for your
understanding,
cooperation and the
continued trust in us<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">On the contrary, the working group
understanding, cooperation and trust in the cochairs is only
possible when cochairs dont undermine and disregard the WG
rules of engagement (PDP) enshrined in the Afrinic CPM.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Not once but twice, the cochairs have attempted
to selectively chose what policy proposal you wish to advance.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Whether its the controversial resources transfer
proposal or now this new controversial recall proposal, its
the disregard of the policy development process that makes
members of this working group to fail to understand cooperate
and trust in your efforts as cochairs.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">By the way, there is nothing wrong with the
recall proposal. However, its we the working group with the
mandate to determine its fate through the policy development
process. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Which is;</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">1. Authors submit a draft to the rpd list for
consideration.</div>
<div dir="auto">2. Afrinic staff records it and publishes it
with an ID.</div>
<div dir="auto">3. The working group then takes it time to
discuss the draft proposal.</div>
<div dir="auto">4. In the next PPM, the draft proposal is then
added to the PPM Agenda by cochairs.</div>
<div dir="auto">5. Its authors presents the proposal to the
working group who would engage with the authors for more
discussions and clarification etc.</div>
<div dir="auto">6.Afrinic staff would then also present their
staff impact assessment and analysis.</div>
<div dir="auto">7. The cochairs would then based on all the
above process determine if the draft proposal was attained
rough consensus or not.</div>
<div dir="auto">8. If there is rough consensus then cochair
would give the WG more time during last call for final
discussions which may include editorial changes etc.</div>
<div dir="auto">9. Otherwise the draft proposal would have to go
back to the WG list for futher discussion.</div>
<div dir="auto">10. The determination of whether the proposal
needs a waiver of the working group cochair to invoke section
3.6 due to an emergency would come at this stage.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">So you can clearly see that the policy
development process has its timelines and its never rushed
because AFRINIC above all, is affected by each and every
action that is taken through the community bottom up process.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Therefore, when cochairs attempt to invoke
section 3.6 while disregarding the above laid out process from
1 - 9 and rush to attempt to vary the process, is what makes
the working group loose trust and fail to cooperate as you
have seen with all the backlash from various members of this
working group. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">You can indeed claim that there was a call by
someone in the working group, requesting you to invoke section
3.6. Its indeed within that person right to request whatever
they want. But its within your wisdom as cochair to know
better and know the process and inform the said member that
what they are requesting is impossible since the CPM is clear
on how each new Draft Policy Proposal is treated as per the
PDP.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">I shall therefore reiterate that you give
respect to the PDP process for once and fwiw there is no
emergency here but what seems like serious confusion and/or
lack of understanding in the part of the cochairs and the
person who called for the process to be disregarded by
cochairs. </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><span style="font-family:sans-serif">Whatever we
do, always think AFRINIC at the back of your mind. We shall
not compromise AFRINIC.</span></div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Noah</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<a href="mailto:RPD@afrinic.net" target="_blank">RPD@afrinic.net</a>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<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" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd</a><br>
</blockquote></div>