[ripe-list] repeated and continued PDP violation - WG chairs delaying or denying proposal publication - new policy proposal "Ensure Neutrality of PDP Appeals Procedure"

Hi Sander,

The last appeal demonstrated that:

1) Folks that should haven’t participated in the appeal, actually participated. It is clear that if you had a previous clear idea about a proposal, and even exposed it in the list during the discussion, shouldn't participate in the appeal. I think that something very obvious.
2) The one submitting the appeal, may recognize "issues" with someone resolving the appeal (was not my case, this time, but it happens), and then it should be able to deny that person participating in the resolution of the appeal.
3) If you want to be neutral, you need another layer, even if this adds some bureaucracy. What is clear is that the same layer of "judges" (the WGCC), even if we can trust they can be objective and neutral, it doesn't appear like that. It is about human nature.
4) The proposal number was the one available during the exchange of emails with the PDO. I've not changed it when sending the PDF to the list, just to keep the text "as it was". I fully understand that it will be provided at publication time by the staff, and this is the reason, in my email (subject and body), I've not used it at all, just the proposal title.


Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 7/2/21 22:46, "Sander Steffann" <sander at steffann.nl> escribió:

    Hi Jordi,

    Only responding to your proposal. I think this is a horrible idea.
    Things are rarely, if ever, solved by inventing more layers of
    bureaucracy. Creating an appeals committee is about the worst way to
    deal with your unhappiness that the chairs don't agree with you.

    The current policy already states that anybody who is involved in the
    dispute has to recuse themselves, so there is no conflict of interest
    to "fix".

    Cheers,
    Sander


    PS: PLEASE don't invent your own proposal numbers. The RIPE NCC PDO is
    the one who keeps track of proposal numbers. You can discuss things on
    this list, but please stop giving your proposals self-invented numbers
    to make them look more official.



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.theipv6company.com
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.