Of course, nobody can force others to work with anyone, however this means:

1) We can't call this community anymore open, transparent and inclusive.
2) Several people not willing to work with others will create a number of 
groups of people working on the same or very similar things, and they we will 
have funny discussions when we have competing policy proposals.

I don't think this is right neither good at all. Of course, in that case, the 
chairs will need to avoid discrimination and accept all the possible different 
proposals from different people, which is smarter than having a single one.

And by the way, if you don't want to work with other community member(s), you 
should openly tell that.

Also, the chairs should have made explicit that the call for volunteers was 
done to create different groups of people not willing to work with others, as 
clearly the chairs knew that some "small" group was working already on that, 
and they didn't even provide the opportunity to the other volunteers to 
participate.

Regards,
Jordi
@jordipalet
 
 

El 16/3/22, 13:04, "Gert Doering" <[email protected]> escribió:

    Hi,

    On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 12:25:27PM +0100, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via 
address-policy-wg wrote:
    > We have already seen several samples of discrimination in the RIPE 
community since some months ago. Is this one more? Should we change the 
principles of openness and inclusivity?

    You can not force random volunteer people (with no formal power or mandate)
    to work with you.

    This has nothing to do with "inclusivity" but with "it's my choice who
    I spend my time with".  

    It's also only discrimination if there is a process for joining and you 
    are rejected because you are "Jordi", instead of generic reasoning, like
    "we have enough people already".  (OTOH, with all these accusations being
    thrown around by you, I'm sure all volunteer groups will all be totally 
    happy to have you on board, and will be making exceptions to their rules,
     just for you.  Which would not be discriminating, of course.)


    Now, for everything relevant to policy decisions, this happens on the
    public list.  If you haven't seen anything, this is because nothing has
    happened yet.

    Gert Doering
            -- volunteer
    -- 
    have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?

    SpaceNet AG                      Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Michael 
Emmer
    Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14        Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
    D-80807 Muenchen                 HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
    Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444         USt-IdNr.: DE813185279



**********************************************
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.




-- 

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your 
subscription options, please visit: 
https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/address-policy-wg

Reply via email to