[PDB Gov] Risk of excessive DE-CIX influence on PeeringDB

[John van Oppen]

Chris -

It is inappropriate to ask this when it is not currently in the bylaws, why are you pushing this so hard?   Is there a policy being violated here?  If the answer to the policy violation is that there is none we should just move along.
John

-----Original Message-----
From: Pdb-gov <pdb-gov-bounces at lists.peeringdb.com> On Behalf Of Chris Caputo via Pdb-gov
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2026 11:35 AM
To: Yolandi Cloete <yolandi at peeringdb.com>; Arnold Nipper <arnold at peeringdb.com>
Cc: Chris Caputo <ccaputo at alt.net>; pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com
Subject: Re: [PDB Gov] Risk of excessive DE-CIX influence on PeeringDB

On Tue, 14 Apr 2026, Yolandi Cloete wrote:
> Alternatively for this round of voting,* if it so happens *that the 
> two of us are the top two voted candidates, we could hold a second 
> round of voting in which members vote for only one of us. The second 
> seat should be awarded to the third‑highest‑voted candidate.

Without restarting it completely, the election process conducted by PeeringDB can't really be altered while it is underway.

That said, if neither you nor Arnold will withdraw from this election, one or both of you could make a public commitment that if both elected, one of you will not accept the election and thus defer to the next ranked choice candidate.

Are you Yolandi willing to make that commitment?

Is Arnold?

Chris