From jnoulaye at yahoo.fr Fri Dec 4 13:43:51 2015 From: jnoulaye at yahoo.fr (jnoulaye at yahoo.fr) Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 13:43:51 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Community-Discuss] The Governance Committee: Way forward In-Reply-To: <1727344516.25231919.1449228058033.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1727344516.25231919.1449228058033.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Dear Afrinic Members, The Governance Committee charter is a wonderful document we have now.?After the discussion in face to face on it yesterday ?I understood that the board will continue ?receiving comments, and will come out with the consolidated document during the next AGMM.?Below are my few comments.a) My feeling is that the constitution of the GC is too large. I expected ?a committee of maximum ?of 3 people, since the role of that Committee is only ?to provide ADVICES when it is needed to the Board of ?Directors.b) My take is that AFRINIC is still a very small organization to have a GC of 11 members.c) I suggest that when the charter will be consolidated by the Board, we just keep it and re-reactive it when the need will be. If you agree with me, ?we add the following as article 11 into the current draft. ------11 - Starting of the ?Governance Committee.The Governance Committee will start acting when the need will be, by an ordinary resolution of AFRINIC Membership at the Annual General Member's Meeting requesting the board to take such action.------ Best wishes to All. Janvier NgnoulayeAfrinic MemberAcademia - Yaounde Cameroon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mje at posix.co.za Fri Dec 4 13:54:30 2015 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 15:54:30 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] The Governance Committee: Way forward In-Reply-To: <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1727344516.25231919.1449228058033.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1449237270.4725.52.camel@posix.co.za> On Fri, 2015-12-04 at 13:43 +0000, jnoulaye at yahoo.fr wrote: > Dear Afrinic Members, > > The Governance Committee charter is a wonderful document we have now. > After the discussion in face to face on it yesterday I understood > that the board will continue receiving comments, and will come out > with the consolidated document during the next AGMM. I agree - its basically there. > Below are my few comments. > a) My feeling is that the constitution of the GC is too large. I > expected a committee of maximum of 3 people, since the role of that > Committee is only to provide ADVICES when it is needed to the Board > of Directors. I also agree with you - I also believe it can be much smaller. > b) My take is that AFRINIC is still a very small organization to have > a GC of 11 members. ...and is not overflowing with money to spend. > c) I suggest that when the charter will be consolidated by the Board, > we just keep it and re-reactive it when the need will be. If you agree > with me, we add the following as article 11 into the current draft. > > ------ > 11 - Starting of the Governance Committee. > The Governance Committee will start acting when the need will be, by > an ordinary resolution of AFRINIC Membership at the Annual General > Member's Meeting requesting the board to take such action. > ------ > > > Best wishes to All. > > > Janvier Ngnoulaye > Afrinic Member > Academia - Yaounde Cameroon > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5667 bytes Desc: not available URL: From amelnaud at gmail.com Sat Dec 5 11:01:54 2015 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 11:01:54 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] The Governance Committee: Way forward In-Reply-To: <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1727344516.25231919.1449228058033.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I think that this mail raises some important aspects of the GC which I totaly support and suggest that we address them while we still discussing about the GC ToR. Best wish. Arnaud Le 4 d?c. 2015 13:47, "jnoulaye at yahoo.fr" a ?crit : > Dear Afrinic Members, > The Governance Committee charter is a wonderful document we have now. > After the discussion in face to face on it yesterday I understood that > the board will continue receiving comments, and will come out with the > consolidated document during the next AGMM. > Below are my few comments. > a) My feeling is that the constitution of the GC is too large. I expected > a committee of maximum of 3 people, since the role of that Committee is > only to provide ADVICES when it is needed to the Board of Directors. > b) My take is that AFRINIC is still a very small organization to have a GC > of 11 members. > c) I suggest that when the charter will be consolidated by the Board, we > just keep it and re-reactive it when the need will be. If you agree with > me, we add the following as article 11 into the current draft. > ------ > 11 - Starting of the Governance Committee. > The Governance Committee will start acting when the need will be, by an > ordinary resolution of AFRINIC Membership at the Annual General Member's > Meeting requesting the board to take such action. > ------ > > Best wishes to All. > > Janvier Ngnoulaye > Afrinic Member > Academia - Yaounde Cameroon > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amelnaud at gmail.com Sat Dec 5 12:52:04 2015 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 12:52:04 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee Message-ID: Dear Afrinic community, I understood after the face to face discussions on this topic, that we can still send comments and suggestions on this. Since the role of this committee is to verify compliance with the SLA in providing services on this critical function which is both administrative and technical , it is important to define the profile of those who are to serve on this committee, define the selection mechanism and their term. I think that instead of automatically appointing those who are already serving at NRO NC / ASO AC, we shall open it and give chance to other competents people to also serve. Regards Arnaud -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrhountomey at gmail.com Sat Dec 5 16:10:38 2015 From: jrhountomey at gmail.com (Jean Robert Hountomey) Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 10:10:38 -0600 Subject: [Community-Discuss] The Governance Committee: Way forward In-Reply-To: <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <1727344516.25231919.1449228058033.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <56630C7E.5060302@gmail.com> Thank you Janvier. While I share your views I would like to add few comments. 5. Membership. AfriNIC has a Council of Elders (1). The bylaws states: " Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organization as former Chairs." I wonder why we cannot give that role to members of the CE. Don't we trust them? Second, this doesn't require additional elections, doesn't require a bylaws change and doesn't require significant expense. Third, I do think that a Governance Committee should be vested with the powers to oppose a decision made by the Board. If they can't then why create another organization to give advice to the Board ? Isn't the advice provided by the CE at this time efficient? (1). http://www.afrinic.net/en/about-us/our-structure/council-of-elders Thanks. Jean Robert On 12/4/15 7:43 AM, jnoulaye at yahoo.fr wrote: > Dear Afrinic Members, > The Governance Committee charter is a wonderful document we have now. > After the discussion in face to face on it yesterday I understood > that the board will continue receiving comments, and will come out > with the consolidated document during the next AGMM. > Below are my few comments. > a) My feeling is that the constitution of the GC is too large. I > expected a committee of maximum of 3 people, since the role of that > Committee is only to provide ADVICES when it is needed to the Board > of Directors. > b) My take is that AFRINIC is still a very small organization to have > a GC of 11 members. > c) I suggest that when the charter will be consolidated by the Board, > we just keep it and re-reactive it when the need will be. If you agree > with me, we add the following as article 11 into the current draft. > ------ > 11 - Starting of the Governance Committee. > The Governance Committee will start acting when the need will be, by > an ordinary resolution of AFRINIC Membership at the Annual General > Member's Meeting requesting the board to take such action. > ------ > > Best wishes to All. > > Janvier Ngnoulaye > Afrinic Member > Academia - Yaounde Cameroon > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Sat Dec 5 17:29:31 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2015 18:29:31 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] The Governance Committee: Way forward In-Reply-To: <56630C7E.5060302@gmail.com> References: <1727344516.25231919.1449228058033.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <101636775.8250540.1449236631408.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <56630C7E.5060302@gmail.com> Message-ID: Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 5 Dec 2015 18:11, "Jean Robert Hountomey" wrote: > > Third, I do think that a Governance Committee should be vested with the powers to oppose a decision made by the Board. > SO: From the current charter, the GC once constituted will be able to recommend/advice on decisions that may have been made by board. However, it should/must remain within the powers of the members to act based on the GC advice. The board must remain the top of the organisation and we should not create yet another small group of people with such powers (another board) to oppose boards decision. > If they can't then why > create another organization to give advice to the Board ? > SO: The GC does not just advice the board, it advices the community as well. So it could advice the community to do xyz because the board failed to do abc. The council of elders on the other hand are a team of experienced expert who provides high level advice to the board, especially when there are issues that has generate unreasonable controversies et all. It would be inefficient/belittling to put have the COE carry out the role of the GC. The GC by charter is expected to engage more with the community Regards > > > > On 12/4/15 7:43 AM, jnoulaye at yahoo.fr wrote: >> >> Dear Afrinic Members, >> The Governance Committee charter is a wonderful document we have now. >> After the discussion in face to face on it yesterday I understood that the board will continue receiving comments, and will come out with the consolidated document during the next AGMM. >> Below are my few comments. >> a) My feeling is that the constitution of the GC is too large. I expected a committee of maximum of 3 people, since the role of that Committee is only to provide ADVICES when it is needed to the Board of Directors. >> b) My take is that AFRINIC is still a very small organization to have a GC of 11 members. >> c) I suggest that when the charter will be consolidated by the Board, we just keep it and re-reactive it when the need will be. If you agree with me, we add the following as article 11 into the current draft. >> ------ >> 11 - Starting of the Governance Committee. >> The Governance Committee will start acting when the need will be, by an ordinary resolution of AFRINIC Membership at the Annual General Member's Meeting requesting the board to take such action. >> ------ >> >> Best wishes to All. >> >> Janvier Ngnoulaye >> Afrinic Member >> Academia - Yaounde Cameroon >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ondouglas at gmail.com Mon Dec 7 11:30:52 2015 From: ondouglas at gmail.com (Douglas Onyango) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:30:52 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Governance Committe draft version 2 In-Reply-To: <549E94F5-8A6D-4D61-AAB1-7D68C06C4F33@afrinic.net> References: <549E94F5-8A6D-4D61-AAB1-7D68C06C4F33@afrinic.net> Message-ID: Hi Alan, Following the publication of the Governance Committee proposal v2, I wish to submit the following comments: Sections: Preamble: I think the preamble should also include the legal instrument used by the board to constitute this committee. Reference to the relevant clause in the AFRINIC by-laws should be sufficient. Section 2.3 (interference). Any other board committee can use this clause to deny the governance committee information/co-operation, especially when the said committee and the governance committee don?t see things the same way on a given matter. I suggest that this clause be modified to allow ?interference? with respect to 2.1/2 and 4.1/2, where the governance committee is only requesting information and not actively halting or derailing proceedings. Section 3.1.3: Committee SOW exclusions The exclusions here don?t make sense: the Governance committee is only advisory in nature, I don?t see why they can?t look into and provide advice on internal workings of some committees, as long as they can adhere to privacy and any other rules that these committees are bound by. Section 3.1.5: Committee taking on an execution role This is an execution role, and is at odds with section 2, where the governance committee is only supposed to play a neutral, advisory role. It should be expunged. The members of the governance committee members may discharge such functions, but not as the committee. Section 3.2.2 (Out of scope) should be removed for reasons already given above. Section 4.2.2 Committee proposing resolutions Companies Act is clear on who can propose a motion and committees are not on that list. This should be appropriately advised. I think the governance committee should content itself with providing advise. There should be provision within their charter that allows or encourages them to push for the implementation or ratification of that advise, except it take the form of more advise. Section 4.3 As above, this should be expunged. Further to reasons given above, I also foresee a potential for abuse with this provision, where the governance committee can become a cabal and just overturn the entire institution. I therefore strongly recommend that 4.3 be removed all together. Section 4.4.1: The expectation to respond to information requests in a reasonable timeframe and in good faith should apply to every party that the governance committee shall request information from. It shouldn?t be confined to ?other AFRINIC-related bodies? as in this paragraph. The paragraph should be revised accordingly. Regards, On 24 November 2015 at 20:41, Alan Barrett wrote: > Dear Members, > > The Board has considered the comments on version 1 of the Governance Committee draft terms of reference, and has prepared the attached updates for version 2. > > I attach the following three files: > > 1. Version 2 of the draft terms of reference for the Governance Committee; > 2. A redline document showing changes from version 1 to version 2; > 3. A table summarising comments received on version 1, and how those comments have been handled. > > Note that the Governance Committee is one of the items on the agenda of the Special General Members? Meeting in Poiunte Noire next week. The Board will take into account comments made in this mailing list or in the SGMM. > > Alan Barrett > CEO, AFRINIC > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Members-Discuss mailing list > Members-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > -- Douglas Onyango, PRINCE 2, ITILv3 UG: +256 776 716 138 From mctimconsulting at gmail.com Mon Dec 7 17:08:19 2015 From: mctimconsulting at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 12:08:19 -0500 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, Having the NRO NC/ASO AC do this task seems to me to be the simplest path forward. There is no need to set up a new committee, with its associated costs and effort to do what the NRO NC could easily do with minimal effort. The SLA review wouldn't take up much time at all on an annual basis, would it? Regards, McTim On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Arnaud AMELINA wrote: > Dear Afrinic community, > I understood after the face to face discussions on this topic, that we can > still send comments and suggestions on this. > > Since the role of this committee is to verify compliance with the SLA in > providing services on this critical function which is both administrative > and technical , it is important to define the profile of those who are to > serve on this committee, define the selection mechanism and their term. > > I think that instead of automatically appointing those who are already > serving at NRO NC / ASO AC, we shall open it and give chance to other > competents people to also serve. > > Regards > > Arnaud > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > From owen at delong.com Mon Dec 7 19:00:09 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 11:00:09 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Agreed! Owen > On Dec 7, 2015, at 09:08 , McTim wrote: > > Hi, > > Having the NRO NC/ASO AC do this task seems to me to be the simplest > path forward. > > There is no need to set up a new committee, with its associated costs > and effort to do what the NRO NC could easily do with minimal effort. > The SLA review wouldn't take up much time at all on an annual basis, > would it? > > Regards, > > McTim > > On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Arnaud AMELINA wrote: >> Dear Afrinic community, >> I understood after the face to face discussions on this topic, that we can >> still send comments and suggestions on this. >> >> Since the role of this committee is to verify compliance with the SLA in >> providing services on this critical function which is both administrative >> and technical , it is important to define the profile of those who are to >> serve on this committee, define the selection mechanism and their term. >> >> I think that instead of automatically appointing those who are already >> serving at NRO NC / ASO AC, we shall open it and give chance to other >> competents people to also serve. >> >> Regards >> >> Arnaud >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From amelnaud at gmail.com Mon Dec 7 19:56:02 2015 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 19:56:02 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, It seems that there is something that escapes you. This task is also technique, which can not be as simple as you thought. Moreover, in my humble opinion there is no additional cost to generate because the meeting will be made remotely by videoconferencing. More importantly, it seems to me that the function of NRO NC / ASO AC, escapes you, this committee is already involved in ALS level as advisors, they can not be reviewer again, which would amount to be judge and party. 2015-12-07 17:08 GMT+00:00 McTim : > Hi, > > Having the NRO NC/ASO AC do this task seems to me to be the simplest > path forward. > > There is no need to set up a new committee, with its associated costs > and effort to do what the NRO NC could easily do with minimal effort. > The SLA review wouldn't take up much time at all on an annual basis, > would it? > > Regards, > > McTim > > On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Arnaud AMELINA wrote: > > Dear Afrinic community, > > I understood after the face to face discussions on this topic, that we > can > > still send comments and suggestions on this. > > > > Since the role of this committee is to verify compliance with the SLA in > > providing services on this critical function which is both > administrative > > and technical , it is important to define the profile of those who are to > > serve on this committee, define the selection mechanism and their term. > > > > I think that instead of automatically appointing those who are already > > serving at NRO NC / ASO AC, we shall open it and give chance to other > > competents people to also serve. > > > > Regards > > > > Arnaud > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Mon Dec 7 20:41:51 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 12:41:51 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Arnaud, Your concerns are specious IMHO. The ASO AC acts as advisors on policy matters. The role here being discussed for this supposed new committee is to review as representatives of the RIR community whether or not ICANN has performed the IANA functions for the numbers community to an adequate level. The ASO AC as elected representatives of the RIR community are, in fact, perfectly capable of taking on that role. Their advisory role on policy is not a conflict of interest for this oversight role IMHO. You are very presumptuous to claim that McTim or I do not understand the function of NRO NC/ASO AC. I?m quite certain that we understand it very well and have significant experience working with said group over many years. Owen > On Dec 7, 2015, at 11:56 , Arnaud AMELINA wrote: > > Hi, > It seems that there is something that escapes you. This task is also technique, which can not be as simple as you thought. Moreover, in my humble opinion there is no additional cost to generate because the meeting will be made remotely by videoconferencing. > > More importantly, it seems to me that the function of NRO NC / ASO AC, escapes you, this committee is already involved in ALS level as advisors, they can not be reviewer again, which would amount to be judge and party. > > 2015-12-07 17:08 GMT+00:00 McTim >: > Hi, > > Having the NRO NC/ASO AC do this task seems to me to be the simplest > path forward. > > There is no need to set up a new committee, with its associated costs > and effort to do what the NRO NC could easily do with minimal effort. > The SLA review wouldn't take up much time at all on an annual basis, > would it? > > Regards, > > McTim > > On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Arnaud AMELINA > wrote: > > Dear Afrinic community, > > I understood after the face to face discussions on this topic, that we can > > still send comments and suggestions on this. > > > > Since the role of this committee is to verify compliance with the SLA in > > providing services on this critical function which is both administrative > > and technical , it is important to define the profile of those who are to > > serve on this committee, define the selection mechanism and their term. > > > > I think that instead of automatically appointing those who are already > > serving at NRO NC / ASO AC, we shall open it and give chance to other > > competents people to also serve. > > > > Regards > > > > Arnaud > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amelnaud at gmail.com Tue Dec 8 12:41:37 2015 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 13:41:37 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, French version : Le d?bat essentiel n'est pas de discuter autour de la capacit? de nos deux repr?sentant ?lus par la communaut? au NRO NC/ASO AC ? servir au niveau IANA numbering services review commitee. La proposition du Internet Numbers community proposal a d?finie la mise en place d'un nouveau comit? de review de "IANA numbering service review commitee" au lieu de confier la mission au NRO NC/ASO AC par d?faut. Ma proposition ?tait de d?finir le peofile des gens et comment est-ce que nous les s?lectionnons, ce qui n'exclut en rien les deux repr?sentants actuels du NRO NC/ASO AC, mais de donner aussi la chance ? d'autres personnes aussi comp?tentes de servir si posible. Ce qui am?ne ? des questions et des reflexions : - Pourquoi la proposition n'a-t-elle pas recommand? l'utilisation du NRO NC ASO AC comme reviewers par d?faut, pour le "IANA Numbering service review commitee" ? - Si on veut utliser les ressources disponibles au niveau du NRO NC / ASO AC, Pourquoi exclure celui d?sign? par le board au NRO NC / ASO AC ? - certaines personnes font r?f?rence ? des probl?mes de co?t li? ? la mise en place d'un nouveau comit? de volontaire qui doivent travailler exclusivement par t?l?conf?rence. Sommes-nous entrain de dire qu'? cause de co?t, Afrinic ne serait pas en mesure d'honorer cet engagement li? son core business si n?cessaire ? - La s?paration des r?les d?s que possible a toujours ?t? une bonne option. English version The key issue is not to talk about the ability of our two representatives elected by the community at NRO NC / ASO AC to serve IANA numbering services review committee. The Internet number community proposal has defined the establishment of a new review committee for the "IANA numbering services" instead of entrusting the NRO NC / ASO AC by default. My point was to define the profile of the people and how do we select them, which does not exclude the two existing representatives at NRO NC / ASO AC, but also give chance to other competent people to serve if possible. This leads to some questions and reflections: - Why the proposal has not recommended the NRO NC / ASO AC as reviewers of the "IANA Numbering Service"? - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why exclude the one designated by the board ? - Some people refer to "costs" issues related to the implementation of a new voluntary committee who must work exclusively via teleconference. Are we saying that because of "costs", Afrinic would not be able to honor this commitment linked to its core business if necessary? - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good option. Good day to all Arnaud. 2015-12-07 21:41 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong : > Arnaud, > > Your concerns are specious IMHO. > > The ASO AC acts as advisors on policy matters. > > The role here being discussed for this supposed new committee is to review > as representatives of the RIR community whether or not ICANN has performed > the IANA functions for the numbers community to an adequate level. > > The ASO AC as elected representatives of the RIR community are, in fact, > perfectly capable of taking on that role. Their advisory role on policy is > not a conflict of interest for this oversight role IMHO. > > You are very presumptuous to claim that McTim or I do not understand the > function of NRO NC/ASO AC. I?m quite certain that we understand it very > well and have significant experience working with said group over many > years. > > Owen > > On Dec 7, 2015, at 11:56 , Arnaud AMELINA wrote: > > Hi, > It seems that there is something that escapes you. This task is also > technique, which can not be as simple as you thought. Moreover, in my > humble opinion there is no additional cost to generate because the meeting > will be made remotely by videoconferencing. > > More importantly, it seems to me that the function of NRO NC / ASO AC, > escapes you, this committee is already involved in ALS level as advisors, > they can not be reviewer again, which would amount to be judge and party. > > 2015-12-07 17:08 GMT+00:00 McTim : > >> Hi, >> >> Having the NRO NC/ASO AC do this task seems to me to be the simplest >> path forward. >> >> There is no need to set up a new committee, with its associated costs >> and effort to do what the NRO NC could easily do with minimal effort. >> The SLA review wouldn't take up much time at all on an annual basis, >> would it? >> >> Regards, >> >> McTim >> >> On Sat, Dec 5, 2015 at 7:52 AM, Arnaud AMELINA >> wrote: >> > Dear Afrinic community, >> > I understood after the face to face discussions on this topic, that we >> can >> > still send comments and suggestions on this. >> > >> > Since the role of this committee is to verify compliance with the SLA in >> > providing services on this critical function which is both >> administrative >> > and technical , it is important to define the profile of those who are >> to >> > serve on this committee, define the selection mechanism and their term. >> > >> > I think that instead of automatically appointing those who are already >> > serving at NRO NC / ASO AC, we shall open it and give chance to other >> > competents people to also serve. >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > Arnaud >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Community-Discuss mailing list >> > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Tue Dec 8 20:23:41 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 12:23:41 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> > The key issue is not to talk about the ability of our two representatives elected by the community at NRO NC / ASO AC to serve IANA numbering services review committee. We as a global body have more than 2 elected representatives on the NRO NC. There are two per RIR Region. (in addition to the one appointed by the board for each region, bringing the total to 15, not 2). > > The Internet number community proposal has defined the establishment of a new review committee for the "IANA numbering services" instead of entrusting the NRO NC / ASO AC by default. The point that others are making is that we believe this to be an error and believe that this role should be entrusted to the NRO NC/ASO AC. Not ?by default? as you so obnoxiously put it, but by choice and because they are the people we have already chosen to represent the community in interactions with the IANA, so they are, in fact, the ones in the best position to provide oversight as to whether or not the IANA is meeting the needs of the community they were elected to represent. Creating an additional body of outsiders to oversee this process means you have a group of people who are not involved in the process on a regular basis making judgments from a less informed perspective using a more limited tool set and less data. I do not see how this can possibly be a good choice. > My point was to define the profile of the people and how do we select them, which does not exclude the two existing representatives at NRO NC / ASO AC, but also give chance to other competent people to serve if possible. I understand that your point is to take the current decision and treat it as a fait accomplis. However, others of us wish to express our dissent from that decision and reject its premise. > This leads to some questions and reflections: > > - Why the proposal has not recommended the NRO NC / ASO AC as reviewers of the "IANA Numbering Service?? An excellent question. I do not have a good answer for you, which is one of the reasons I think it was an erroneous decision. > - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why exclude the one designated by the board ? I see no reason to do so and I never called for any such exclusion. > - Some people refer to "costs" issues related to the implementation of a new voluntary committee who must work exclusively via teleconference. Are we saying that because of "costs", Afrinic would not be able to honor this commitment linked to its core business if necessary? Obviously not. However, the creation of, management of, maintenance of, election or selection of, and other processes needed to keep a committee operational are not without cost. What is being said is that we have a better choice readily available without any additional costs, rendering these costs unnecessary. > - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good option. No. The separation of roles when there is a conflict of interest is always an important and good choice. In this case, there is not only a conflict of interest, but a synergy of the roles such that the greatest benefit comes from combining them. The ASO/AC has a liaison role between the RIRs and the IANA providing stewardship over the global policy development process and managing the process of communication between the IANA and the RIR Communities. They are elected by and serve those communities. As such, they are in an ideal position to evaluate the level of performance of the IANA in its duties to those communities and provide the required feedback and oversight. Any other body would actually be by definition less informed and less able to render proper judgment. Owen From amelnaud at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 10:41:27 2015 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 10:41:27 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> References: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> Message-ID: English version : ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Owen, We heard your dissent views on the IANA numbering service review committee. Some of us think there is Conflict of Interest (the NRO NC/ASO AC has a role in the path to the ICANN board relating to IP address policy). This review work as defined, has a technical aspect wich is not part of the NRO/NC mandate. It may well be that your view was considered by CRISP, but we are working with what is defined with respect to IANA numbering service review committee. I am done on this topic. French version : ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Owen, nous avons entendu votre point de vue de la dissidence sur le comit? d'examen des services de num?rotation de l'IANA. Certains d'entre nous pensent qu'il y'a conflit d'int?r?ts (NRO NC / ASO AC) a un r?le envers le CA de l'ICANN li? ? la politique de l'adresse IP). Ce travail d'?valuation tel que d?fini, a un aspect technique qui ne fait pas partie du mandat NRO / NC. Il se pourrait bien que votre point de vue a ?t? pris en compte par le CRISP, mais nous nous travaillons avec ce qui ?t? d?fini par rapport au comit? d'examen des services de num?rotation de l'IANA. J'ai fini avec ce sujet. Good day. Le 8 d?c. 2015 20:25, "Owen DeLong" a ?crit : > > The key issue is not to talk about the ability of our two > representatives elected by the community at NRO NC / ASO AC to serve IANA > numbering services review committee. > > We as a global body have more than 2 elected representatives on the NRO > NC. There are two per RIR Region. (in addition to the one appointed by the > board for each region, > bringing the total to 15, not 2). > > > > > > The Internet number community proposal has defined the establishment of > a new review committee for the "IANA numbering services" instead of > entrusting the NRO NC / ASO AC by default. > > The point that others are making is that we believe this to be an error > and believe that this role should be entrusted to the NRO NC/ASO AC. Not > ?by default? as you so obnoxiously put it, > but by choice and because they are the people we have already chosen to > represent the community in interactions with the IANA, so they are, in > fact, the ones in the best position to provide > oversight as to whether or not the IANA is meeting the needs of the > community they were elected to represent. > > Creating an additional body of outsiders to oversee this process means you > have a group of people who are not involved in the process on a regular > basis making judgments from a > less informed perspective using a more limited tool set and less data. I > do not see how this can possibly be a good choice. > > > My point was to define the profile of the people and how do we select > them, which does not exclude the two existing representatives at NRO NC / > ASO AC, but also give chance to other competent people to serve if possible. > > I understand that your point is to take the current decision and treat it > as a fait accomplis. However, others of us wish to express our dissent from > that decision and reject its premise. > > > This leads to some questions and reflections: > > > > - Why the proposal has not recommended the NRO NC / ASO AC as reviewers > of the "IANA Numbering Service?? > > An excellent question. I do not have a good answer for you, which is one > of the reasons I think it was an erroneous decision. > > > - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why > exclude the one designated by the board ? > > I see no reason to do so and I never called for any such exclusion. > > > - Some people refer to "costs" issues related to the implementation of a > new voluntary committee who must work exclusively via teleconference. Are > we saying that because of "costs", Afrinic would not be able to honor this > commitment linked to its core business if necessary? > > Obviously not. However, the creation of, management of, maintenance of, > election or selection of, and other processes needed to keep a committee > operational are not without cost. > > What is being said is that we have a better choice readily available > without any additional costs, rendering these costs unnecessary. > > > - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good > option. > > No. The separation of roles when there is a conflict of interest is always > an important and good choice. In this case, there is not only a conflict of > interest, but a synergy of the roles such that the greatest benefit comes > from combining them. > > The ASO/AC has a liaison role between the RIRs and the IANA providing > stewardship over the global policy development process and managing the > process of communication between the IANA and the RIR Communities. They are > elected by and serve those communities. As such, they are in an ideal > position to evaluate the level of performance of the IANA in its duties to > those communities and provide the required feedback and oversight. Any > other body would actually be by definition less informed and less able to > render proper judgment. > > Owen > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 11:17:13 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 12:17:13 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> Message-ID: Hello Arnaud, all As one of those who suggested that the work of the review team be carried out by the NRO-NC, I believe conflict of interest does not exist on both roles. There is really no point where both roles will be in conflict, i.e one role is not subject to the other. For example, one could say having the same person serve as PDWG Co-Chair and Board member posits a conflict since board approves policy (even though we know pdwg chairs don't just come up with policies and 1 person does not make up the board). In the case of the review team and the ASO work, there doesn't exist any of such situation where what I described above is possible. That said, one could say that current NRO-NC members may not have enough skills to review IANA operation because it's not part of their selection criteria (which is a far guess as most NC members are experienced folks from the community), so I think it may be good to add one more requirement relating to understanding IANA operations(as it concern numbers) to the NRO-NC election criteria. Hopefully this can be included in the next election call for the NRO-NC position in our region. The work of the review team is going to be almost a check box activity as most of the operations is automated. IMO it will be too small a job to get a whole new set of people for and I don't think the NRO-EC is that busy not to be able to add that little task to their agenda ;-) Regards On Dec 9, 2015 11:42, "Arnaud AMELINA" wrote: > English version : > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Owen, We heard your dissent views on the IANA numbering service review > committee. Some of us think there is Conflict of Interest (the NRO NC/ASO > AC has a role in the path to the ICANN board relating to IP address > policy). This review work as defined, has a technical aspect wich is not > part of the NRO/NC mandate. It may well be that your view was considered by > CRISP, but we are working with what is defined with respect to IANA > numbering service review committee. I am done on this topic. > > French version : > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Owen, nous avons entendu votre point de vue de la dissidence sur le comit? > d'examen des services de num?rotation de l'IANA. Certains d'entre nous > pensent qu'il y'a conflit d'int?r?ts (NRO NC / ASO AC) a un r?le envers le > CA de l'ICANN li? ? la politique de l'adresse IP). Ce travail d'?valuation > tel que d?fini, a un aspect technique qui ne fait pas partie du mandat NRO > / NC. Il se pourrait bien que votre point de vue a ?t? pris en compte par > le CRISP, mais nous nous travaillons avec ce qui ?t? d?fini par rapport au > comit? d'examen des services de num?rotation de l'IANA. J'ai fini avec ce > sujet. > > Good day. > Le 8 d?c. 2015 20:25, "Owen DeLong" a ?crit : > >> > The key issue is not to talk about the ability of our two >> representatives elected by the community at NRO NC / ASO AC to serve IANA >> numbering services review committee. >> >> We as a global body have more than 2 elected representatives on the NRO >> NC. There are two per RIR Region. (in addition to the one appointed by the >> board for each region, >> bringing the total to 15, not 2). >> >> >> > >> > The Internet number community proposal has defined the establishment of >> a new review committee for the "IANA numbering services" instead of >> entrusting the NRO NC / ASO AC by default. >> >> The point that others are making is that we believe this to be an error >> and believe that this role should be entrusted to the NRO NC/ASO AC. Not >> ?by default? as you so obnoxiously put it, >> but by choice and because they are the people we have already chosen to >> represent the community in interactions with the IANA, so they are, in >> fact, the ones in the best position to provide >> oversight as to whether or not the IANA is meeting the needs of the >> community they were elected to represent. >> >> Creating an additional body of outsiders to oversee this process means >> you have a group of people who are not involved in the process on a regular >> basis making judgments from a >> less informed perspective using a more limited tool set and less data. I >> do not see how this can possibly be a good choice. >> >> > My point was to define the profile of the people and how do we select >> them, which does not exclude the two existing representatives at NRO NC / >> ASO AC, but also give chance to other competent people to serve if possible. >> >> I understand that your point is to take the current decision and treat it >> as a fait accomplis. However, others of us wish to express our dissent from >> that decision and reject its premise. >> >> > This leads to some questions and reflections: >> > >> > - Why the proposal has not recommended the NRO NC / ASO AC as >> reviewers of the "IANA Numbering Service?? >> >> An excellent question. I do not have a good answer for you, which is one >> of the reasons I think it was an erroneous decision. >> >> > - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why >> exclude the one designated by the board ? >> >> I see no reason to do so and I never called for any such exclusion. >> >> > - Some people refer to "costs" issues related to the implementation of >> a new voluntary committee who must work exclusively via teleconference. Are >> we saying that because of "costs", Afrinic would not be able to honor this >> commitment linked to its core business if necessary? >> >> Obviously not. However, the creation of, management of, maintenance of, >> election or selection of, and other processes needed to keep a committee >> operational are not without cost. >> >> What is being said is that we have a better choice readily available >> without any additional costs, rendering these costs unnecessary. >> >> > - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good >> option. >> >> No. The separation of roles when there is a conflict of interest is >> always an important and good choice. In this case, there is not only a >> conflict of interest, but a synergy of the roles such that the greatest >> benefit comes from combining them. >> >> The ASO/AC has a liaison role between the RIRs and the IANA providing >> stewardship over the global policy development process and managing the >> process of communication between the IANA and the RIR Communities. They are >> elected by and serve those communities. As such, they are in an ideal >> position to evaluate the level of performance of the IANA in its duties to >> those communities and provide the required feedback and oversight. Any >> other body would actually be by definition less informed and less able to >> render proper judgment. >> >> Owen >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 11:59:21 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 12:59:21 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> References: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> Message-ID: On Dec 8, 2015 21:25, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > This leads to some questions and reflections: > > > > - Why the proposal has not recommended the NRO NC / ASO AC as reviewers of the "IANA Numbering Service?? > > An excellent question. I do not have a good answer for you, which is one of the reasons I think it was an erroneous decision. > SO: FWIW I happen to be one of those who suggested that the NRO-NC be assigned reviewers role during the preparation of the proposal, while there were other +1 it wasn't sufficient enough to convince the group at that time. One reason that said then was the need to separate roles instead of just integrating to the ASO AC role, it was clarified/agreed then that separation of the roles does not extend to the people, which I think was reasonable enough. IMO I still think we should have just assigned the separated role to the NRO-NC globally. Nevertheless, I guess leaving it the way it was done was to give each community independence of choice and option. > > - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why exclude the one designated by the board ? > > I see no reason to do so and I never called for any such exclusion. > SO: In our case, we agreed that the CEO appoints the 3rd person and I think the 3rd must be staff as required by the review committee charter. That is why the board appointed NRO-NC member may not apply. Another reason is that the charter requires the 2 appointees be elected/selected by the community. (Well we may argue whether those appointed by board can be said to be appointed by the community) > > - Some people refer to "costs" issues related to the implementation of a new voluntary committee who must work exclusively via teleconference. Are we saying that because of "costs", Afrinic would not be able to honor this commitment linked to its core business if necessary? > > Obviously not. However, the creation of, management of, maintenance of, election or selection of, and other processes needed to keep a committee operational are not without cost. > > What is being said is that we have a better choice readily available without any additional costs, rendering these costs unnecessary. > SO: This is correct. > > - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good option. > > No. The separation of roles when there is a conflict of interest is always an important and good choice. In this case, there is not only a conflict of interest, but a synergy of the roles such that the greatest benefit comes from combining them. > SO: Trying to parse your statement above seem to imply there is conflict of interest? I don't think so and I think separation of roles process wise is already done. Separation of roles in relation to person is what is in question and since there is no conflict in the roles (process wise) then we should not worry about the person part. Regards > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Wed Dec 9 13:30:14 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 14:30:14 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> Message-ID: On Dec 9, 2015 12:17, "Seun Ojedeji" wrote: > > > For example, one could say having the same person serve as PDWG Co-Chair and Board member posits a conflict since board approves policy > SO: FWIW, It was brought to my attention that the word approves could mean different things to people so the right word here would be "ratifies". Regards (even though we know pdwg chairs don't just come up with policies and 1 person does not make up the board). > > In the case of the review team and the ASO work, there doesn't exist any of such situation where what I described above is possible. That said, one could say that current NRO-NC members may not have enough skills to review IANA operation because it's not part of their selection criteria (which is a far guess as most NC members are experienced folks from the community), so I think it may be good to add one more requirement relating to understanding IANA operations(as it concern numbers) to the NRO-NC election criteria. Hopefully this can be included in the next election call for the NRO-NC position in our region. > > The work of the review team is going to be almost a check box activity as most of the operations is automated. IMO it will be too small a job to get a whole new set of people for and I don't think the NRO-EC is that busy not to be able to add that little task to their agenda ;-) > > Regards > > On Dec 9, 2015 11:42, "Arnaud AMELINA" wrote: >> >> English version : >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Owen, We heard your dissent views on the IANA numbering service review committee. Some of us think there is Conflict of Interest (the NRO NC/ASO AC has a role in the path to the ICANN board relating to IP address policy). This review work as defined, has a technical aspect wich is not part of the NRO/NC mandate. It may well be that your view was considered by CRISP, but we are working with what is defined with respect to IANA numbering service review committee. I am done on this topic. >> >> French version : >> >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Owen, nous avons entendu votre point de vue de la dissidence sur le comit? d'examen des services de num?rotation de l'IANA. Certains d'entre nous pensent qu'il y'a conflit d'int?r?ts (NRO NC / ASO AC) a un r?le envers le CA de l'ICANN li? ? la politique de l'adresse IP). Ce travail d'?valuation tel que d?fini, a un aspect technique qui ne fait pas partie du mandat NRO / NC. Il se pourrait bien que votre point de vue a ?t? pris en compte par le CRISP, mais nous nous travaillons avec ce qui ?t? d?fini par rapport au comit? d'examen des services de num?rotation de l'IANA. J'ai fini avec ce sujet. >> >> Good day. >> >> Le 8 d?c. 2015 20:25, "Owen DeLong" a ?crit : >>> >>> > The key issue is not to talk about the ability of our two representatives elected by the community at NRO NC / ASO AC to serve IANA numbering services review committee. >>> >>> We as a global body have more than 2 elected representatives on the NRO NC. There are two per RIR Region. (in addition to the one appointed by the board for each region, >>> bringing the total to 15, not 2). >>> >>> >>> > >>> > The Internet number community proposal has defined the establishment of a new review committee for the "IANA numbering services" instead of entrusting the NRO NC / ASO AC by default. >>> >>> The point that others are making is that we believe this to be an error and believe that this role should be entrusted to the NRO NC/ASO AC. Not ?by default? as you so obnoxiously put it, >>> but by choice and because they are the people we have already chosen to represent the community in interactions with the IANA, so they are, in fact, the ones in the best position to provide >>> oversight as to whether or not the IANA is meeting the needs of the community they were elected to represent. >>> >>> Creating an additional body of outsiders to oversee this process means you have a group of people who are not involved in the process on a regular basis making judgments from a >>> less informed perspective using a more limited tool set and less data. I do not see how this can possibly be a good choice. >>> >>> > My point was to define the profile of the people and how do we select them, which does not exclude the two existing representatives at NRO NC / ASO AC, but also give chance to other competent people to serve if possible. >>> >>> I understand that your point is to take the current decision and treat it as a fait accomplis. However, others of us wish to express our dissent from that decision and reject its premise. >>> >>> > This leads to some questions and reflections: >>> > >>> > - Why the proposal has not recommended the NRO NC / ASO AC as reviewers of the "IANA Numbering Service?? >>> >>> An excellent question. I do not have a good answer for you, which is one of the reasons I think it was an erroneous decision. >>> >>> > - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why exclude the one designated by the board ? >>> >>> I see no reason to do so and I never called for any such exclusion. >>> >>> > - Some people refer to "costs" issues related to the implementation of a new voluntary committee who must work exclusively via teleconference. Are we saying that because of "costs", Afrinic would not be able to honor this commitment linked to its core business if necessary? >>> >>> Obviously not. However, the creation of, management of, maintenance of, election or selection of, and other processes needed to keep a committee operational are not without cost. >>> >>> What is being said is that we have a better choice readily available without any additional costs, rendering these costs unnecessary. >>> >>> > - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good option. >>> >>> No. The separation of roles when there is a conflict of interest is always an important and good choice. In this case, there is not only a conflict of interest, but a synergy of the roles such that the greatest benefit comes from combining them. >>> >>> The ASO/AC has a liaison role between the RIRs and the IANA providing stewardship over the global policy development process and managing the process of communication between the IANA and the RIR Communities. They are elected by and serve those communities. As such, they are in an ideal position to evaluate the level of performance of the IANA in its duties to those communities and provide the required feedback and oversight. Any other body would actually be by definition less informed and less able to render proper judgment. >>> >>> Owen >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Wed Dec 9 19:41:49 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 11:41:49 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] IANA nubering service review commitee In-Reply-To: References: <13B77150-C637-4EDD-A92D-637EB40B12E1@delong.com> Message-ID: > > > - If we were to use the resources available at the NRO NC / ASO AC, Why exclude the one designated by the board ? > > > > I see no reason to do so and I never called for any such exclusion. > > > > SO: In our case, we agreed that the CEO appoints the 3rd person and I think the 3rd must be staff as required by the review committee charter. That is why the board appointed NRO-NC member may not apply. Another reason is that the charter requires the 2 appointees be elected/selected by the community. (Well we may argue whether those appointed by board can be said to be appointed by the community) > Yes, but in this case, those reasons presuppose the existing (arguably erroneous) decision to comprise a new committee. If, instead, we simply appoint the task to the NRO NC, then there is no longer such a requirement and the full NRO NC should be the body appointed to the task, including the board-appointed member from each region. If we stick with the currently defined structure, then it does, in fact, disqualify the board-appointed NRO NC member from serving and serves as an additional argument for the detrimental nature of the current decision. > > > - The separation of roles whenever possible has always been a good option. > > > > > No. The separation of roles when there is a conflict of interest is always an important and good choice. In this case, there is not only a conflict of interest, but a synergy of the roles such that the greatest benefit comes from combining them. > > > SO: Trying to parse your statement above seem to imply there is conflict of interest? I don't think so and I think separation of roles process wise is already done. Separation of roles in relation to person is what is in question and since there is no conflict in the roles (process wise) then we should not worry about the person part. > No? I?m saying that separation of roles is only necessary or useful _IF_ there is a conflict of interest. I?m further saying no such COI exists in this case. I view it this way? NRO/RIRs are a customer of IANA functions role. NRO NC/ASO AC are the contract administrators for that customer/vendor relationship. The role of this new committee is to decide on a periodic basis whether or not IANA functions provider has performed adequately to the satisfaction of the NRO/RIRs. Who better to make that determination than the contract administrators? If the NRO NC/ASO AC were given the responsibility for identifying potential replacement vendors or selecting one, then I would say there is a COI. However, evaluating whether or not the contractor has performed being decided by the collective of the contract administrators seems not only free from COI, but much more likely to yield an accurate result. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Serge.Ilunga at vodacom.cd Fri Dec 11 18:12:34 2015 From: Serge.Ilunga at vodacom.cd (Ilunga, Serge, Vodacom DRC) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 18:12:34 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Governance Committe draft version 2 In-Reply-To: References: <549E94F5-8A6D-4D61-AAB1-7D68C06C4F33@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <16500F9AAE4A5F40A1A13DC12CD8CA479E43CA3B@CDKINJSSPMMB01.vodacom.cd> Hello Alan, My comment will go in the same way that I did during AfriNIC-23. Every organization face issues and adapts its structure in order to solve them or mitigate foreseen risks. It is important that we include in the Preamble the reasons why the community has proposed the Governance Committee. With Regards. ----------------------------- Ilunga, Serge, Vodacom DRC Transmission Optimization Manager +243814443160 MEILLEUR RESEAU INTERNET EN RDC ----------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Douglas Onyango [mailto:ondouglas at gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 07, 2015 12:31 PM To: Alan Barrett; community-discuss at afrinic.net Cc: AfriNIC Discuss Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Governance Committe draft version 2 Hi Alan, Following the publication of the Governance Committee proposal v2, I wish to submit the following comments: Sections: Preamble: I think the preamble should also include the legal instrument used by the board to constitute this committee. Reference to the relevant clause in the AFRINIC by-laws should be sufficient. Section 2.3 (interference). Any other board committee can use this clause to deny the governance committee information/co-operation, especially when the said committee and the governance committee don?t see things the same way on a given matter. I suggest that this clause be modified to allow ?interference? with respect to 2.1/2 and 4.1/2, where the governance committee is only requesting information and not actively halting or derailing proceedings. Section 3.1.3: Committee SOW exclusions The exclusions here don?t make sense: the Governance committee is only advisory in nature, I don?t see why they can?t look into and provide advice on internal workings of some committees, as long as they can adhere to privacy and any other rules that these committees are bound by. Section 3.1.5: Committee taking on an execution role This is an execution role, and is at odds with section 2, where the governance committee is only supposed to play a neutral, advisory role. It should be expunged. The members of the governance committee members may discharge such functions, but not as the committee. Section 3.2.2 (Out of scope) should be removed for reasons already given above. Section 4.2.2 Committee proposing resolutions Companies Act is clear on who can propose a motion and committees are not on that list. This should be appropriately advised. I think the governance committee should content itself with providing advise. There should be provision within their charter that allows or encourages them to push for the implementation or ratification of that advise, except it take the form of more advise. Section 4.3 As above, this should be expunged. Further to reasons given above, I also foresee a potential for abuse with this provision, where the governance committee can become a cabal and just overturn the entire institution. I therefore strongly recommend that 4.3 be removed all together. Section 4.4.1: The expectation to respond to information requests in a reasonable timeframe and in good faith should apply to every party that the governance committee shall request information from. It shouldn?t be confined to ?other AFRINIC-related bodies? as in this paragraph. The paragraph should be revised accordingly. Regards, On 24 November 2015 at 20:41, Alan Barrett wrote: > Dear Members, > > The Board has considered the comments on version 1 of the Governance Committee draft terms of reference, and has prepared the attached updates for version 2. > > I attach the following three files: > > 1. Version 2 of the draft terms of reference for the Governance > Committee; 2. A redline document showing changes from version 1 to > version 2; 3. A table summarising comments received on version 1, and how those comments have been handled. > > Note that the Governance Committee is one of the items on the agenda of the Special General Members? Meeting in Poiunte Noire next week. The Board will take into account comments made in this mailing list or in the SGMM. > > Alan Barrett > CEO, AFRINIC > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Members-Discuss mailing list > Members-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss > -- Douglas Onyango, PRINCE 2, ITILv3 UG: +256 776 716 138 _______________________________________________ Members-Discuss mailing list Members-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Sat Dec 19 14:54:18 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 15:54:18 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ASO AC EXTENDS NOMINATION PERIOD FOR SEAT 10 ON THE ICANN BOARD OF DIRECTORS In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Any taker from this region? The ASO AC has announced today it has extended its deadline for the nomination period for the selection of seat 10 on the ICANN Board of Directors. Nominations will close now on *Thursday January 7th 2015 at 23:59 UTC* https://aso.icann.org/aso-ac-extends-nomination-period-for-seat-10-on-the-icann-board-of-directors/ Regards -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Serge.Ilunga at vodacom.cd Sat Dec 19 22:33:48 2015 From: Serge.Ilunga at vodacom.cd (Ilunga, Serge, Vodacom DRC) Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 22:33:48 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] board minutes made public In-Reply-To: <5672F658.2070904@geier.ne.tz> References: <5672E2B7.2020201@afrinic.net> <5672F658.2070904@geier.ne.tz> Message-ID: <16500F9AAE4A5F40A1A13DC12CD8CA47A86E7CB9@CDKINJSSPMMB01.vodacom.cd> Hello Chair, I think that the trust we need towards the BOD is critical for our community based organization. Vague promises don't help to built and sustain the required trust. I agree that 80 pages is a lot and I can understand the time taken to compile the document if it was in case of work requiring some deep researches. Is it the case? Kind Regards. ----------------------------- Ilunga, Serge, Vodacom DRC Transmission Optimization Manager +243814443160 MEILLEUR RESEAU INTERNET EN RDC ----------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Frank Habicht [mailto:geier at geier.ne.tz] Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 6:52 PM To: members-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] board minutes made public Hello all, especially Sunday, for a long time i was meaning to write a very positive email. I very clearly had and have the impression that a lot has changed for the better in terms of transparency and accountability of the various functions and bodies of AfriNIC. Many people are still having demands for improvement. That's good and I agree. But I want to note that in my opinion the improvement already achieved is really remarkable and I would like to thank you, Sunday, the whole board and anyone else involved for that. I'm sure many appreciate it. I surely do. Now, like others, I have been looking forward for the publication of board minutes/resolutions for some time, and checked the website without result. [ I have to admit in this my case I don't care much about minutes vs. resolution because i want a date of a meeting in August where a certain policy was ratified ;-) ] On 12/17/2015 7:28 PM, Sunday Folayan wrote: ... > For minutes from January 2015, those will be published after the > Board's meeting near the end of January 2016. So this is the thing that prompted me to respond. This is redefining "latency". This is not inter-planetary latency, that's inter-stellar latency. I get your point that minutes of a meeting run to 80 pages, and that's creating significant burden. I hope not every meeting was that long. I feel it's been along time since anything new on the resolutions-or-minutes front has surfaced. I trust I'm not the only one that gets the impression that some people are getting impatient (you must have noticed ;-) ). I am wondering whether we are waiting for a big bulk of documents to get ready? Or can we instead publish the parts that are ready to be published? [I guess the total amount of argum^Wdiscussion will be the same anyway] Also - this is more to staff - I think this deserves a well-documented and linked and navigable place on the website. I do not want to increase the stress at this time of year when many celebrate holidays and as per Alan many are on leave (or will be). Apologies if that happens. Still, I want to hope that the Jan 2015 to Jan 2016 latency remains an exception. And that improvement continues. Regards, Frank Habicht _______________________________________________ Members-Discuss mailing list Members-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss From virtual.borg at gmail.com Sun Dec 20 13:14:31 2015 From: virtual.borg at gmail.com (Chevalier du Borg) Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 17:14:31 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of check and balance that make this system work - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in hand. thoughts? -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" From owen at delong.com Mon Dec 21 21:50:19 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 13:50:19 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member if it is necessary. The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when making their votes. Owen > On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: > > i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of > check and balance that make this system work > > - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) > > who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? > I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a > board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its > self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should > we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance > committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > hand. > > thoughts? > > > -- > Borg le Chevalier > ___________________________________ > "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From Keshwarsingh.Nadan at millenium.mu Mon Dec 21 22:15:36 2015 From: Keshwarsingh.Nadan at millenium.mu (Keshwarsingh Nadan) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 22:15:36 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> the board sucks ________________________________________ From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member if it is necessary. The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when making their votes. Owen > On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: > > i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of > check and balance that make this system work > > - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) > > who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? > I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a > board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its > self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should > we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance > committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > hand. > > thoughts? > > > -- > Borg le Chevalier > ___________________________________ > "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From mje at posix.co.za Tue Dec 22 07:47:23 2015 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 09:47:23 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> References: , <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> Message-ID: <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. ---- There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the Membership to correct their errors. I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: > the board sucks > ________________________________________ > From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] > Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board > > As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can > choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member > if it is necessary. > > The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter > to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. > > I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that > there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when > making their votes. > > Owen > > > On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: > > > > i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of > > check and balance that make this system work > > > > - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) > > > > who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? > > I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a > > board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its > > self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should > > we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance > > committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > > hand. > > > > thoughts? > > > > > > -- > > Borg le Chevalier > > ___________________________________ > > "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 5667 bytes Desc: not available URL: From alihadji at comorestelecom.km Mon Dec 21 12:42:24 2015 From: alihadji at comorestelecom.km (ALI Hadji Mmadi) Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 15:42:24 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] board minutes made public Message-ID: <009601d13bed$0de403f0$29ac0bd0$@comorestelecom.km> +1 to Illunga So, Without trust we'll live in the mistrust. This is not good for the community, M. Chair. Make sure that you respect your commitements and all actions refers to legal texts. Regards. -----Message d'origine----- De : Ilunga, Serge, Vodacom DRC [mailto:Serge.Ilunga at vodacom.cd] Envoy? : dimanche 20 d?cembre 2015 01:34 ? : Frank Habicht; members-discuss at afrinic.net; General Discussions of AFRINIC(community-discuss at afrinic.net) Objet : Re: [members-discuss] board minutes made public Hello Chair, I think that the trust we need towards the BOD is critical for our community based organization. Vague promises don't help to built and sustain the required trust. I agree that 80 pages is a lot and I can understand the time taken to compile the document if it was in case of work requiring some deep researches. Is it the case? Kind Regards. ----------------------------- Ilunga, Serge, Vodacom DRC Transmission Optimization Manager +243814443160 MEILLEUR RESEAU INTERNET EN RDC ----------------------------- -----Original Message----- From: Frank Habicht [mailto:geier at geier.ne.tz] Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 6:52 PM To: members-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [members-discuss] board minutes made public Hello all, especially Sunday, for a long time i was meaning to write a very positive email. I very clearly had and have the impression that a lot has changed for the better in terms of transparency and accountability of the various functions and bodies of AfriNIC. Many people are still having demands for improvement. That's good and I agree. But I want to note that in my opinion the improvement already achieved is really remarkable and I would like to thank you, Sunday, the whole board and anyone else involved for that. I'm sure many appreciate it. I surely do. Now, like others, I have been looking forward for the publication of board minutes/resolutions for some time, and checked the website without result. [ I have to admit in this my case I don't care much about minutes vs. resolution because i want a date of a meeting in August where a certain policy was ratified ;-) ] On 12/17/2015 7:28 PM, Sunday Folayan wrote: ... > For minutes from January 2015, those will be published after the > Board's meeting near the end of January 2016. So this is the thing that prompted me to respond. This is redefining "latency". This is not inter-planetary latency, that's inter-stellar latency. I get your point that minutes of a meeting run to 80 pages, and that's creating significant burden. I hope not every meeting was that long. I feel it's been along time since anything new on the resolutions-or-minutes front has surfaced. I trust I'm not the only one that gets the impression that some people are getting impatient (you must have noticed ;-) ). I am wondering whether we are waiting for a big bulk of documents to get ready? Or can we instead publish the parts that are ready to be published? [I guess the total amount of argum^Wdiscussion will be the same anyway] Also - this is more to staff - I think this deserves a well-documented and linked and navigable place on the website. I do not want to increase the stress at this time of year when many celebrate holidays and as per Alan many are on leave (or will be). Apologies if that happens. Still, I want to hope that the Jan 2015 to Jan 2016 latency remains an exception. And that improvement continues. Regards, Frank Habicht _______________________________________________ Members-Discuss mailing list Members-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss _______________________________________________ Members-Discuss mailing list Members-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 11698 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sunday.folayan at afrinic.net Tue Dec 22 09:32:33 2015 From: sunday.folayan at afrinic.net (Sunday Folayan) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 10:32:33 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] board minutes made public In-Reply-To: <009601d13bed$0de403f0$29ac0bd0$@comorestelecom.km> References: <009601d13bed$0de403f0$29ac0bd0$@comorestelecom.km> Message-ID: <567918B1.7060107@afrinic.net> Dear Hadji, Seasons greetings!! On 21/12/2015 13:42, ALI Hadji Mmadi wrote: > +1 to Illunga > > So, Without trust we'll live in the mistrust. This is not good for the > community, M. Chair. > > Make sure that you respect your commitements and all actions refers to legal > texts. Kindly explain what you mean by this. What do you expect from me, and when? Thank you. Sunday. From ali at hussein.me.ke Tue Dec 22 09:46:53 2015 From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 12:46:53 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> Message-ID: Hi All I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi Sent from my iPad > On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: > > The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. > Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. > > ---- > > There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the > Membership to correct their errors. > > I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. > >> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >> the board sucks >> ________________________________________ >> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board >> >> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can >> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member >> if it is necessary. >> >> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter >> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. >> >> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that >> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when >> making their votes. >> >> Owen >> >>> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: >>> >>> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >>> check and balance that make this system work >>> >>> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >>> >>> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? >>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >>> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >>> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>> hand. >>> >>> thoughts? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Borg le Chevalier >>> ___________________________________ >>> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -- > Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa > mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 > For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Dec 22 16:12:23 2015 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:12:23 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> Message-ID: On 22 Dec 2015 01:15, "Keshwarsingh Nadan" wrote: > > the board sucks > Which board if you may? :-| Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sergekbk at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 17:31:51 2015 From: sergekbk at gmail.com (serge ilunga) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 18:31:51 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> Message-ID: +1 Ali , Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? Kind Regards. On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: > Hi All > > I have just recently joined the list and have been following the > discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too > early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. > > Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's > goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and > Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe > Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is > meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. > > Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they > public documents we can access? > > *Ali Hussein* > *Principal* > *Hussein & Associates* > +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 > > Twitter: @AliHKassim > > Skype: abu-jomo > > LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim > > > Blog: www.alyhussein.com > > "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking > what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi > > Sent from my iPad > > On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: > > The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. > Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. > > ---- > > There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the > Membership to correct their errors. > > I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. > > On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: > > the board sucks > > ________________________________________ > > From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] > > Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 > > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board > > > As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting > members who can > > choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) > remove a member > > if it is necessary. > > > The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to > each voter > > to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be > different for AfriNIC. > > > I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board > and that > > there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should > consider when > > making their votes. > > > Owen > > > On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg > wrote: > > > i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of > > check and balance that make this system work > > > - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) > > > who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at > large? > > I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a > > board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its > > self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should > > we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance > > committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > > hand. > > > thoughts? > > > > -- > > Borg le Chevalier > > ___________________________________ > > "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > -- > Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa > mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 > For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -- *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA* *Skype: sergekbk* *Cell: +243814443160* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Tue Dec 22 18:33:23 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:33:23 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> Message-ID: On Dec 22, 2015 18:32, "serge ilunga" wrote: > > +1 Ali , > Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. > In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. > SO: Organisation strategy is operational and its within the scope of staff (CEO) to develop, while the board exercise oversight at determining if the strategy is consistent with the organisation's goals and also carrying out periodic review of progress made in the implementation of the strategy. I think there was a 5 years strategic plan shared few years ago, but can't seem to find it on the section of website I expected it will be: http://afrinic.net/en/library/corporate-documents I expect new strategic plan for next couple of years would be in the making by now. Perhaps we will be seeing something at the next meeting. > This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. > SO: I guess one of the ways performance of the board [can be]/is evaluated is through the organisation's reports (annual report, audit report, periodic staff management reports etc). Checking how those reports are align/consistent with the strategic plan could be a basis for evaluation. > Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? > SO: Usually the board would be in the best position to make this evaluation as they would know who is performing or not. To the community, we see the board as a team, so for example because someone is vocal does not usually mean he/she is most performing within board. They are all expected to have different skills/strength. As you know, the board as per bylaw is empowered to discipline/sanction any board member not performing even up to removal if necessary. That said, public misconduct/action of individual board is one thing that can be evaluated by the community and members can on that basis raise concern about a board member (with the option to remove if required) Overall, ultimate judgement is during election. Regards > > Kind Regards. > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: >> >> Hi All >> >> I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. >> >> Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. >> >> Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? >> >> Ali Hussein >> Principal >> Hussein & Associates >> +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> >> Skype: abu-jomo >> >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: >> >>> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. >>> Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the >>> Membership to correct their errors. >>> >>> I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. >>> >>> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >>>> >>>> the board sucks >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >>>> >>>> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >>>> >>>> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board >>>> >>>> >>>> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can >>>> >>>> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member >>>> >>>> if it is necessary. >>>> >>>> >>>> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter >>>> >>>> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. >>>> >>>> >>>> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that >>>> >>>> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when >>>> >>>> making their votes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >>>>> >>>>> check and balance that make this system work >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? >>>>> >>>>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>>>> >>>>> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >>>>> >>>>> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >>>>> >>>>> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>>>> >>>>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>>>> >>>>> hand. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Borg le Chevalier >>>>> >>>>> ___________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>>> >>>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>>> >>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa >>> mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 >>> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > > > > -- > Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA > Skype: sergekbk > Cell: +243814443160 > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ali at hussein.me.ke Wed Dec 23 07:46:36 2015 From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:46:36 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> Message-ID: Serge There are tools available to do this from a single board member to the collective. The important thing to note though is that the evaluation must come from an informed premise of what the goals were. Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113 On Dec 22, 2015 8:32 PM, "serge ilunga" wrote: > +1 Ali , > Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. > In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. > This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the > metric to evaluate BOD members performance. > Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single > BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? > > > Kind Regards. > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> I have just recently joined the list and have been following the >> discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too >> early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. >> >> Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's >> goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and >> Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe >> Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is >> meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. >> >> Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they >> public documents we can access? >> >> *Ali Hussein* >> *Principal* >> *Hussein & Associates* >> +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> >> Skype: abu-jomo >> >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> >> >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking >> what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: >> >> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. >> Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. >> >> ---- >> >> There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the >> Membership to correct their errors. >> >> I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. >> >> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >> >> the board sucks >> >> ________________________________________ >> >> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >> >> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >> >> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >> >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic >> board >> >> >> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting >> members who can >> >> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) >> remove a member >> >> if it is necessary. >> >> >> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up >> to each voter >> >> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be >> different for AfriNIC. >> >> >> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the >> board and that >> >> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should >> consider when >> >> making their votes. >> >> >> Owen >> >> >> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg >> wrote: >> >> >> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >> >> check and balance that make this system work >> >> >> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >> >> >> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at >> large? >> >> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >> >> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >> >> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >> >> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >> >> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >> >> hand. >> >> >> thoughts? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Borg le Chevalier >> >> ___________________________________ >> >> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> -- >> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa >> mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 >> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> > > > -- > *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA* > *Skype: sergekbk* > *Cell: +243814443160* > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Wed Dec 23 08:57:08 2015 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:57:08 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> Message-ID: <22544806-DE64-4247-A727-6DCC0AABB55A@nftconsult.com> +1 On 12/23/15, 10:46 AM, "Ali Hussein" wrote: Serge There are tools available to do this from a single board member to the collective. The important thing to note though is that the evaluation must come from an informed premise of what the goals were. Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113 On Dec 22, 2015 8:32 PM, "serge ilunga" wrote: +1 Ali , Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? Kind Regards. On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: Hi All I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi Sent from my iPad On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. ---- There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the Membership to correct their errors. I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: the board sucks ________________________________________ From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member if it is necessary. The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when making their votes. Owen On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of check and balance that make this system work - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in hand. thoughts? -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA Skype: sergekbk Cell: +243814443160 _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ali at hussein.me.ke Wed Dec 23 11:29:37 2015 From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:29:37 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board In-Reply-To: References: <8139A2D4BA5CE94C98E1A584DDEA679302DAC9D4@exchange1.prod.servihoo.net> <1450770443.11591.11.camel@posix.co.za> Message-ID: Serge My understanding of board responsibility is that it's collective. The only place/time I see where individual board members are held accountable is during AGMs where members/shareholders vote to retain or replace board members. It's possible that there is a better way of evaluating individual board members but haven't come across one yet..:-) Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi Sent from my iPad > On 22 Dec 2015, at 8:31 PM, serge ilunga wrote: > > +1 Ali , > Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. > In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. > This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. > Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? > > > Kind Regards. > >> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: >> Hi All >> >> I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. >> >> Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. >> >> Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? >> >> Ali Hussein >> Principal >> Hussein & Associates >> +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> Skype: abu-jomo >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: >>> >>> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. >>> Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the >>> Membership to correct their errors. >>> >>> I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. >>> >>>> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >>>> the board sucks >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >>>> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >>>> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >>>> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board >>>> >>>> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can >>>> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member >>>> if it is necessary. >>>> >>>> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter >>>> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. >>>> >>>> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that >>>> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when >>>> making their votes. >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>>> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: >>>>> >>>>> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >>>>> check and balance that make this system work >>>>> >>>>> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >>>>> >>>>> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? >>>>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>>>> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >>>>> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >>>>> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>>>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>>>> hand. >>>>> >>>>> thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Borg le Chevalier >>>>> ___________________________________ >>>>> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>> >>> -- >>> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa >>> mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 >>> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > -- > Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA > Skype: sergekbk > Cell: +243814443160 > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gnonkoto.patrick at artci.ci Wed Dec 23 12:38:24 2015 From: gnonkoto.patrick at artci.ci (GH.-GNONKOTO Serges PATRICK) Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 12:38:24 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 5, Issue 11 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: All boards Noah Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. Send Community-Discuss mailing list submissions to community-discuss at afrinic.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to community-discuss-request at afrinic.net You can reach the person managing the list at community-discuss-owner at afrinic.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Community-Discuss digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: How to mesure performance of afrinic board (Noah) 2. Re: How to mesure performance of afrinic board (serge ilunga) 3. Re: How to mesure performance of afrinic board (Seun Ojedeji) 4. Re: How to mesure performance of afrinic board (Ali Hussein) 5. Re: How to mesure performance of afrinic board (Badru Ntege) 6. Re: How to mesure performance of afrinic board (Ali Hussein) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:12:23 +0300 From: Noah To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On 22 Dec 2015 01:15, "Keshwarsingh Nadan" wrote: > > the board sucks > Which board if you may? :-| Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 18:31:51 +0100 From: serge ilunga To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" +1 Ali , Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? Kind Regards. On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: > Hi All > > I have just recently joined the list and have been following the > discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too > early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. > > Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's > goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and > Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe > Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is > meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. > > Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they > public documents we can access? > > *Ali Hussein* > *Principal* > *Hussein & Associates* > +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 > > Twitter: @AliHKassim > > Skype: abu-jomo > > LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim > > > Blog: www.alyhussein.com > > "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking > what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi > > Sent from my iPad > > On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: > > The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. > Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. > > ---- > > There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the > Membership to correct their errors. > > I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. > > On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: > > the board sucks > > ________________________________________ > > From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] > > Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 > > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board > > > As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting > members who can > > choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) > remove a member > > if it is necessary. > > > The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to > each voter > > to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be > different for AfriNIC. > > > I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board > and that > > there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should > consider when > > making their votes. > > > Owen > > > On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg > wrote: > > > i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of > > check and balance that make this system work > > > - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) > > > who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at > large? > > I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a > > board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its > > self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should > > we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance > > committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > > hand. > > > thoughts? > > > > -- > > Borg le Chevalier > > ___________________________________ > > "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > -- > Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa > mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 > For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -- *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA* *Skype: sergekbk* *Cell: +243814443160* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 19:33:23 +0100 From: Seun Ojedeji To: General discussion of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Dec 22, 2015 18:32, "serge ilunga" wrote: > > +1 Ali , > Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. > In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. > SO: Organisation strategy is operational and its within the scope of staff (CEO) to develop, while the board exercise oversight at determining if the strategy is consistent with the organisation's goals and also carrying out periodic review of progress made in the implementation of the strategy. I think there was a 5 years strategic plan shared few years ago, but can't seem to find it on the section of website I expected it will be: http://afrinic.net/en/library/corporate-documents I expect new strategic plan for next couple of years would be in the making by now. Perhaps we will be seeing something at the next meeting. > This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. > SO: I guess one of the ways performance of the board [can be]/is evaluated is through the organisation's reports (annual report, audit report, periodic staff management reports etc). Checking how those reports are align/consistent with the strategic plan could be a basis for evaluation. > Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? > SO: Usually the board would be in the best position to make this evaluation as they would know who is performing or not. To the community, we see the board as a team, so for example because someone is vocal does not usually mean he/she is most performing within board. They are all expected to have different skills/strength. As you know, the board as per bylaw is empowered to discipline/sanction any board member not performing even up to removal if necessary. That said, public misconduct/action of individual board is one thing that can be evaluated by the community and members can on that basis raise concern about a board member (with the option to remove if required) Overall, ultimate judgement is during election. Regards > > Kind Regards. > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: >> >> Hi All >> >> I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. >> >> Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. >> >> Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? >> >> Ali Hussein >> Principal >> Hussein & Associates >> +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> >> Skype: abu-jomo >> >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: >> >>> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. >>> Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the >>> Membership to correct their errors. >>> >>> I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. >>> >>> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >>>> >>>> the board sucks >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> >>>> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >>>> >>>> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >>>> >>>> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board >>>> >>>> >>>> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can >>>> >>>> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member >>>> >>>> if it is necessary. >>>> >>>> >>>> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter >>>> >>>> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. >>>> >>>> >>>> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that >>>> >>>> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when >>>> >>>> making their votes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >>>>> >>>>> check and balance that make this system work >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? >>>>> >>>>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>>>> >>>>> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >>>>> >>>>> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >>>>> >>>>> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>>>> >>>>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>>>> >>>>> hand. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Borg le Chevalier >>>>> >>>>> ___________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> >>>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>>> >>>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>>> >>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa >>> mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 >>> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> > > > > -- > Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA > Skype: sergekbk > Cell: +243814443160 > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 10:46:36 +0300 From: Ali Hussein To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Serge There are tools available to do this from a single board member to the collective. The important thing to note though is that the evaluation must come from an informed premise of what the goals were. Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113 On Dec 22, 2015 8:32 PM, "serge ilunga" wrote: > +1 Ali , > Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. > In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. > This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the > metric to evaluate BOD members performance. > Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single > BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? > > > Kind Regards. > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> I have just recently joined the list and have been following the >> discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too >> early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. >> >> Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's >> goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and >> Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe >> Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is >> meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. >> >> Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they >> public documents we can access? >> >> *Ali Hussein* >> *Principal* >> *Hussein & Associates* >> +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> >> Skype: abu-jomo >> >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> >> >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking >> what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >> On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: >> >> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. >> Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. >> >> ---- >> >> There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the >> Membership to correct their errors. >> >> I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. >> >> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >> >> the board sucks >> >> ________________________________________ >> >> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >> >> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >> >> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >> >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic >> board >> >> >> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting >> members who can >> >> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) >> remove a member >> >> if it is necessary. >> >> >> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up >> to each voter >> >> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be >> different for AfriNIC. >> >> >> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the >> board and that >> >> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should >> consider when >> >> making their votes. >> >> >> Owen >> >> >> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg >> wrote: >> >> >> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >> >> check and balance that make this system work >> >> >> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >> >> >> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at >> large? >> >> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >> >> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >> >> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >> >> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >> >> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >> >> hand. >> >> >> thoughts? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Borg le Chevalier >> >> ___________________________________ >> >> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> -- >> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa >> mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 >> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> > > > -- > *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA* > *Skype: sergekbk* > *Cell: +243814443160* > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 11:57:08 +0300 From: Badru Ntege To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: <22544806-DE64-4247-A727-6DCC0AABB55A at nftconsult.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" +1 On 12/23/15, 10:46 AM, "Ali Hussein" wrote: Serge There are tools available to do this from a single board member to the collective. The important thing to note though is that the evaluation must come from an informed premise of what the goals were. Ali Hussein Tel: +254 713 601113 On Dec 22, 2015 8:32 PM, "serge ilunga" wrote: +1 Ali , Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? Kind Regards. On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: Hi All I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi Sent from my iPad On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. ---- There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the Membership to correct their errors. I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: the board sucks ________________________________________ From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member if it is necessary. The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when making their votes. Owen On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of check and balance that make this system work - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in hand. thoughts? -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA Skype: sergekbk Cell: +243814443160 _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2015 14:29:37 +0300 From: Ali Hussein To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Serge My understanding of board responsibility is that it's collective. The only place/time I see where individual board members are held accountable is during AGMs where members/shareholders vote to retain or replace board members. It's possible that there is a better way of evaluating individual board members but haven't come across one yet..:-) Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim Blog: www.alyhussein.com "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi Sent from my iPad > On 22 Dec 2015, at 8:31 PM, serge ilunga wrote: > > +1 Ali , > Mission (Goal) and Values are the key drivers of any organization. > In the case of AfriNIC, the BOD is to put in place a strategic plan. > This responsability being shared by the whole board, what can be the metric to evaluate BOD members performance. > Even the metrics are set, how can we evaluate the performance of a single BOD member while their terms don't start at the same time? > > > Kind Regards. > >> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Ali Hussein wrote: >> Hi All >> >> I have just recently joined the list and have been following the discussions on the Afrinic Board with interest. Whilst I believe it's too early for me to provide an opinion I have one contribution to make. >> >> Any Board has the fiduciary responsibility to drive the organization's goals as stipulated by its members /shareholders through its Memorandum and Articles which usually are broken down by period Strategic Plans. I believe Boards should ultimately be judged by whether an organisation is meeting/exceeding its mandate through the implementation of the above. >> >> Do we have in place such reviews? And how are they structured? Are they public documents we can access? >> >> Ali Hussein >> Principal >> Hussein & Associates >> +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 >> >> Twitter: @AliHKassim >> Skype: abu-jomo >> LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim >> Blog: www.alyhussein.com >> >> "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what no one else has thought". ~ Albert Szent-Gy?rgyi >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On 22 Dec 2015, at 10:47 AM, Mark Elkins wrote: >>> >>> The Board was put there by AFRINIC Members in good standing. >>> Ergo, AFRINIC Members suck at choosing Board Members. >>> >>> ---- >>> >>> There is a reason why a Term only lasts three years... it allows the >>> Membership to correct their errors. >>> >>> I personally think the Board does not suck and is actually pretty good. >>> >>>> On Mon, 2015-12-21 at 22:15 +0000, Keshwarsingh Nadan wrote: >>>> the board sucks >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> From: Owen DeLong [owen at delong.com] >>>> Sent: 22 December 2015 1:50 >>>> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC >>>> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] How to mesure performance of afrinic board >>>> >>>> As a general rule, the only check and balance on a board is the voting members who can >>>> choose to change out the board and the board itself who can (usually) remove a member >>>> if it is necessary. >>>> >>>> The method for measuring the effectiveness of the board is generally up to each voter >>>> to determine for his/her self and I don?t see any reason this should be different for AfriNIC. >>>> >>>> I think the members of AfriNIC are perfectly capable of electing the board and that >>>> there is no reason we should dictate to them what criteria they should consider when >>>> making their votes. >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>>> On Dec 20, 2015, at 05:14 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: >>>>> >>>>> i have been thinking about this for a while. there's a triangle of >>>>> check and balance that make this system work >>>>> >>>>> - board check and balance ceo (and staff?) >>>>> >>>>> who does check and balance on board? members only? or the community at large? >>>>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>>>> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >>>>> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? should >>>>> we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>>>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>>>> hand. >>>>> >>>>> thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Borg le Chevalier >>>>> ___________________________________ >>>>> "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>> >>> -- >>> Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa >>> mje at posix.co.za Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 >>> For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > -- > Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA > Skype: sergekbk > Cell: +243814443160 > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss ------------------------------ End of Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 5, Issue 11 ************************************************ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From virtual.borg at gmail.com Mon Dec 28 12:24:18 2015 From: virtual.borg at gmail.com (Chevalier du Borg) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 16:24:18 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board Message-ID: i have been thinking about this for a while: - board check and balance ceo. but who checks and balance the board? members only? or the community at large? I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? (or should we just wait till we see big red warning light of oncoming failure?) should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in hand. thoughts? -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" From jacques.houngbo at africacert.org Mon Dec 28 12:57:40 2015 From: jacques.houngbo at africacert.org (Jacques Houngbo) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 12:57:40 -0000 (GMT) Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1451307460.616730611@apps.rackspace.com> Bonjour ? tous, Je saute sur ce message parce qu'il sugg?re que cette mission incombe au Comit? de gouvernance que nous tentons de mettre sur pied. Remontons un peu au d?but des ?v?nements. Certains membres du board ont pos? des actes qui sont tr?s peu orthodoxes: les p?rip?ties des votes en Gambie, ? Djibouti et ? Tunis sont ?loquentes ? ce sujet. Depuis ces ?v?nements, nous avons entrepris de mettre sur pied un comit? de gouvernance. Et je constate que c'est le board qui met en place ce comit? de gouvernance, moyen que nous avons con?u pour ajouter un peu plus d'?thique ? son action! Ceci pourrait ne pas nous aider ? obtenir ce que nous voulons. Et c'est l? que je nous propose d'utiliser au mieux les outils dont nous disposons d?j?. Je veux citer l'un d'entre eux, le comit? des anciens. Ce comit? a l'avantage d'exister d?j?, d'?tre enti?rement l?gal (les statuts le cr?ent nom?ment), et surtout de rassembler des personnes qui nous d?j?, ? plusieurs reprises, d?montr? leurs capacit?s de leadership. Je crois que nous pouvons leur demander express?ment d'assurer le r?le de garant de l'?thique du board. En r?sum?, le comit? de gouvernance, mon avis est que nous n'en avons pas besoin. Je reviendrai plus tard sur la question d'?valuation des performances du board. Jacques -----Original Message----- From: "Chevalier du Borg" Sent: Monday, December 28, 2015 12:24pm To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board i have been thinking about this for a while: - board check and balance ceo. but who checks and balance the board? members only? or the community at large? I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? (or should we just wait till we see big red warning light of oncoming failure?) should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in hand. thoughts? -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From owen at delong.com Mon Dec 28 20:05:26 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2015 12:05:26 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> > On Dec 28, 2015, at 04:24 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: > > i have been thinking about this for a while: > > - board check and balance ceo. but who checks and balance the board? > members only? or the community at large? As in any organization, the check and balance for the board are: 1. Legal (there are laws governing the fiduciary responsibilities of a board). 2. Members (through the elective process) 3. CEO (through communication with the membership/shareholders) 4. Self-policing (the board may remove a mis-behaving member from its ranks through proper process) In AfriNIC case, there is also some level of accountability to the community, but the community is not empowered to apply any sort of forceful control over the board. The members do have forceful power over the board in that they can refuse to re-elect a board member. I don?t know if there is a process in AfriNIC for membership or community to initiate the removal of one or more board members prior to the expiration of their term. > I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a > board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its > self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? (or > should we just wait till we see big red warning light of oncoming > failure?) That?s very hard to do. If you ask 10 different people what the AfriNIC board should have as their number 1 priority, you may well get as many as 12 different answers. The AFriNIC community (and membership) is quite diverse and has many differing and often conflicting priorities. What one may view as the board doing a fantastic job may in the eyes of another be considered a complete failure. This is why we use elections. So that each person can evaluate board member performance according to their own particular criteria and vote accordingly. As I have said a few times in this thread, attempting to dictate the basis on which others evaluate board candidates is unlikely to produce a useful result. If you are asking for advice on how you should evaluate board member performance, then I would suggest the following: 1. Consider what you think should be the primary things AfriNIC focuses on. 2. Look at the minutes of board meetings and voting record of board members. 3. Compare the data from item 2 to your thoughts on item 1 and decide whether you feel that the actions in item 2 match the goals in item 1 or not. > should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance > committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > hand. The devil is in the details here. We should not, IMHO, make the board accountable to a committee that effectively serves at the pleasure of the board. That creates a number of conflicts of interest around how the committee is selected, how the committee performs its duties and how the committee can communicate with the community and the membership. The governance committee, IMHO, should be focused on issues of process and procedure to ensure that the processes and procedures in place are serving the community and provide adequate controls to ensure that the governance of AfriNIC does not stray too far from the ideals of the community without the community being able to apply necessary corrections. > thoughts? See above. ;-) Owen From virtual.borg at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 05:18:00 2015 From: virtual.borg at gmail.com (Chevalier du Borg) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 09:18:00 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> Message-ID: thank you Owen for your useful inputs! 2015-12-29 0:05 GMT+04:00 Owen DeLong : > In AfriNIC case, there is also some level of accountability to the community, > but the community is not empowered to apply any sort of forceful control > over the board. The members do have forceful power over the board in > that they can refuse to re-elect a board member. I don?t know if there is a > process in AfriNIC for membership or community to initiate the removal > of one or more board members prior to the expiration of their term. i'm not aware there is any such process. someone who knows better should clarify this. > >> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >> board being effective? should we clarifie this mesures so that its >> self-evidence to everyone when board is doing good job or not? (or >> should we just wait till we see big red warning light of oncoming >> failure?) > > That?s very hard to do. If you ask 10 different people what the AfriNIC board > should have as their number 1 priority, you may well get as many as 12 different > answers. hard but not impossible. one way or another, board agrees on some priority and its fruit/result can only become evident in 1 - 2 years time. i am interested in the simple weekly rituals board engages in to makes sure that priority will be attained and/or if it should be adapted. very rough example: priority: i want to publish a book by 2017 a good indicator (predictor?) can be: how many words do i force myself to write every day/week logic being if someone is consistent in writing a 500 word every day, they are more likely to achieve the goal of writing enough for a book > As I have said a few times in this thread, attempting to dictate the basis on which > others evaluate board candidates is unlikely to produce a useful result. I agree with you. I am not asking for criteria to evaluate individual candidates, rather looking for ways to evaluate performance of the board as the whole which you go into below :-) > > If you are asking for advice on how you should evaluate board member performance, > then I would suggest the following: > > 1. Consider what you think should be the primary things AfriNIC focuses on. > 2. Look at the minutes of board meetings and voting record of board members. > 3. Compare the data from item 2 to your thoughts on item 1 and decide > whether you feel that the actions in item 2 match the goals in item 1 or not. this is a reasonable place to start with the caution that what afrinic focuses on determine largely by it strategic plan. not sure if that is responsibility of board or ceo but i assume board must at least approve a plan produce by staff. so in a way, community can hold board for ensure that the strategy is fit where afrinic want to go. so, i what about following informations that are tracked and reported regularly on public website and at meetings a) Monthly or quarterly board meeting attendance record i.e. % of board members that attend each meeting not who attended or did not attend b) Number of resolutions c) Voting record on various issue raise in board meeting d) Issues of focus (as determine from resolutions/minute i.e.) will tell us what board spend most of their time on as you indicate above, these actions above here should correlate to achieving the priorities. if they don't ... then something wrong. also combination of priorities should get afrinic towards its mission (better service to region, financial sustainabilite, etc etc) ...if not then priorities are wrong i admit board job is voluntaire so we cannot measure thing out of normal duties. what does community think about the above? > >> should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >> hand. > > The devil is in the details here. We should not, IMHO, make the board accountable > to a committee that effectively serves at the pleasure of the board. That creates > a number of conflicts of interest around how the committee is selected, how > the committee performs its duties and how the committee can communicate > with the community and the membership. +100 governance council in my opinion should come from community & members and report to community and members and not board. the council can then use a set of measures like suggested above (plus others) to do their work. > > The governance committee, IMHO, should be focused on issues of process and > procedure to ensure that the processes and procedures in place are serving the > community and provide adequate controls to ensure that the governance of > AfriNIC does not stray too far from the ideals of the community without the > community being able to apply necessary corrections. indicators will be - how many times was process A executed this year - how many times was there violation/compliance uhhhh. ....... seems like lot of work ..... but that's price of good governance. :))) > > See above. ;-) > > Owen > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" From randy at psg.com Tue Dec 29 06:43:04 2015 From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:43:04 +0900 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> Message-ID: >>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>> board being effective? > i am interested in the simple weekly rituals board engages in to makes > sure that priority will be attained and/or if it should be adapted. > > very rough example: > > priority: i want to publish a book by 2017 > > a good indicator (predictor?) can be: how many words do i force myself > to write every day/week > > logic being if someone is consistent in writing a 500 word every day, > they are more likely to achieve the goal of writing enough for a book your analogy confuses the board with the executives and staff. a board sets, monitors, and approves policy, not makes widgets. randy From virtual.borg at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 07:42:09 2015 From: virtual.borg at gmail.com (Chevalier du Borg) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 11:42:09 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> Message-ID: 2015-12-29 10:43 GMT+04:00 Randy Bush : >>>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>>> board being effective? >> i am interested in the simple weekly rituals board engages in to makes >> sure that priority will be attained and/or if it should be adapted. >> >> very rough example: >> >> priority: i want to publish a book by 2017 >> >> a good indicator (predictor?) can be: how many words do i force myself >> to write every day/week >> >> logic being if someone is consistent in writing a 500 word every day, >> they are more likely to achieve the goal of writing enough for a book > > your analogy confuses the board with the executives and staff. a board > sets, monitors, and approves policy, not makes widgets. > :-) ... analogies can do that when out of the writers head. the lesson i want to bring out from the analogy is that: for any entity that has a goal, there is something (action, outputs etc) that happen in small enough time increments that can predict likelihood of success at meeting the set goal. (i think this are also called leading indicators) i think your clarification just give me the word i'm looking for: monitor That policy that board sets and approves, the effect can only be know after 1 or 2 years. Now we can't wait for 2 years only to find the policy was bad, therefore the need for monitoring at intervals is what tell the board and us that the policy is having desired effect or not. Thank to your input, I just realise that those things that board monitors is what I am looking for. Making these public on a website so the community can see will address the concern and improve confidence in the board. -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" From owen at delong.com Tue Dec 29 08:13:31 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:13:31 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> Message-ID: <315609D9-3858-4228-9851-CEC7E1209D62@delong.com> >> That?s very hard to do. If you ask 10 different people what the AfriNIC board >> should have as their number 1 priority, you may well get as many as 12 different >> answers. > > > hard but not impossible. one way or another, board agrees on some > priority and its fruit/result can only become evident in 1 - 2 years > time. i am interested in the simple weekly rituals board engages in to > makes sure that priority will be attained and/or if it should be > adapted. > > > very rough example: > > priority: i want to publish a book by 2017 > > a good indicator (predictor?) can be: how many words do i force myself > to write every day/week > > logic being if someone is consistent in writing a 500 word every day, > they are more likely to achieve the goal of writing enough for a book Sure, but you?re missing the idea of how a board is supposed to work. In this case, you?re talking about how well a goal is executed. That is how you evaluate the CEO and the staff. Evaluating the board involves a determination if the goal that they directed the CEO to pursue was the correct goal for the membership and the community. Further, one wants to evaluate whether the board gave the CEO the tools/authority/latitude/resources necessary to execute those goals. Now wha I?ve said in the preceding paragraph may be controversial to some. I don?t have an MBA or any sort of credential, so just following my ideas blindly probably isn?t the best thing to do. However, that?s my best understanding of the role of a board and how they should be evaluated. If you evaluate the board on execution, then a good staff and CEO will cover very well for a lousy board and you can get fantastic execution of really bad goals and plans. Definitely not what this community needs IMHO. >> As I have said a few times in this thread, attempting to dictate the basis on which >> others evaluate board candidates is unlikely to produce a useful result. > > > I agree with you. I am not asking for criteria to evaluate individual > candidates, rather looking for ways to evaluate performance of the > board as the whole which you go into below :-) Well? Actually I intended that to be guidelines about how I go about evaluating the performance of individual candidates. OTOH, boards are small enough groups that it?s hard to separate individual performance from group performance. If one individual is not performing well, they will drag down the whole body. If the body is performing well, then it?s a pretty good indication that each of the members is also performing well. >> If you are asking for advice on how you should evaluate board member performance, >> then I would suggest the following: >> >> 1. Consider what you think should be the primary things AfriNIC focuses on. >> 2. Look at the minutes of board meetings and voting record of board members. >> 3. Compare the data from item 2 to your thoughts on item 1 and decide >> whether you feel that the actions in item 2 match the goals in item 1 or not. > > > this is a reasonable place to start with the caution that what afrinic > focuses on determine largely by it strategic plan. not sure if that is > responsibility of board or ceo but i assume board must at least > approve a plan produce by staff. so in a way, community can hold board > for ensure that the strategy is fit where afrinic want to go. The strategic plan is the responsibility of the board, but remember, the CEO is a member of the board and he should definitely have a lot of input in that process. Think of it like this? The board is the steering committee. The visionaries. They have the responsibility to select the destination and set the mission goals. The CEO and the staff are the captain and crew of the ship. They have the responsibility to chart the course and steer the ship safely to the destination while achieving the other mission goals along the way. > so, i what about following informations that are tracked and reported > regularly on public website and at meetings > > a) Monthly or quarterly board meeting attendance record i.e. % of > board members that attend each meeting not who attended or did not > attend Contained in the minutes. > b) Number of resolutions Contained in the minutes > c) Voting record on various issue raise in board meeting Should be contained in the minutes. > d) Issues of focus (as determine from resolutions/minute i.e.) will > tell us what board spend most of their time on Should be contained in the minutes. > as you indicate above, these actions above here should correlate to > achieving the priorities. if they don't ... then something wrong. > also combination of priorities should get afrinic towards its mission > (better service to region, financial sustainabilite, etc etc) ...if > not then priorities are wrong Yep. > i admit board job is voluntaire so we cannot measure thing out of normal duties. A volunteer job should be evaluated like any other job. Sure, to get volunteers to continue to work as volunteers, sometimes you have to cut them some slack or provide some perks as incentive. In my case, ARIN treats me very well and I get some pretty nice travel opportunities as part of my service to the ARIN community. OTOH, I don?t expect that I am not held to a high standard of work in what I do there just because I am a volunteer. Indeed, I would not even hope to get re-elected if I was not doing a good job of representing the ARIN members that elected me. >>> should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>> hand. >> >> The devil is in the details here. We should not, IMHO, make the board accountable >> to a committee that effectively serves at the pleasure of the board. That creates >> a number of conflicts of interest around how the committee is selected, how >> the committee performs its duties and how the committee can communicate >> with the community and the membership. > > > +100 governance council in my opinion should come from community & > members and report to community and members and not board. the council > can then use a set of measures like suggested above (plus others) to > do their work. I disagree. Setting up a secondary committee that takes direction from the membership (and/or community) is a recipe for disaster and fractious dysfunction throughout the organization. It?s like hiring two captains to pilot a ship and then having one of them report to the owners of the ship and having the other one report to the passengers. No good can come of that. >> The governance committee, IMHO, should be focused on issues of process and >> procedure to ensure that the processes and procedures in place are serving the >> community and provide adequate controls to ensure that the governance of >> AfriNIC does not stray too far from the ideals of the community without the >> community being able to apply necessary corrections. > > indicators will be > > - how many times was process A executed this year > - how many times was there violation/compliance Not really. Those metrics don?t really tell you anything. It?s quite a bit more complicated than that and if simple metrics would tell us what we needed to know, we wouldn?t need a committee to sort the issues out. > uhhhh. ....... seems like lot of work ..... but that's price of good > governance. Yes? It?s even more work than you think, but, yes, it is the price of good governance. Owen From owen at delong.com Tue Dec 29 08:17:46 2015 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:17:46 -0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> Message-ID: [offlist because it may be repetitive to what I posted already] You still missed Randy?s point and I may not have been enough clearer to get it across. Measuring the success or likely success of the goal is a measurement that doesn?t tell you anything about the quality of the board. The board is not responsible for achieving the goal, they are responsible for selecting the correct goal. If you achieve the wrong goal, then your CEO and Staff have done very well, but the board has failed. If you fail to achieve the correct goal, then it?s possible that the CEO and staff have failed while the board is actually very good. However, in this case, the board has the responsibility to address the issues with the CEO and staff, so the board still failed, but indirectly. If you achieve the correct goal, then the board _AND_ the organization are functioning well. So to measure the quality of the board, we need to measure the quality of the goals that are selected for the organization and not the success or failure of meeting those goals. Owen > On Dec 28, 2015, at 23:42 , Chevalier du Borg wrote: > > 2015-12-29 10:43 GMT+04:00 Randy Bush >: >>>>> I also like to know, what are the thing used to measure whether a >>>>> board being effective? >>> i am interested in the simple weekly rituals board engages in to makes >>> sure that priority will be attained and/or if it should be adapted. >>> >>> very rough example: >>> >>> priority: i want to publish a book by 2017 >>> >>> a good indicator (predictor?) can be: how many words do i force myself >>> to write every day/week >>> >>> logic being if someone is consistent in writing a 500 word every day, >>> they are more likely to achieve the goal of writing enough for a book >> >> your analogy confuses the board with the executives and staff. a board >> sets, monitors, and approves policy, not makes widgets. >> > > :-) ... analogies can do that when out of the writers head. the lesson > i want to bring out from the analogy is that: > > for any entity that has a goal, there is something (action, outputs > etc) that happen in small enough time increments that can predict > likelihood of success at meeting the set goal. (i think this are also > called leading indicators) > > i think your clarification just give me the word i'm looking for: monitor > > That policy that board sets and approves, the effect can only be know > after 1 or 2 years. Now we can't wait for 2 years only to find the > policy was bad, therefore the need for monitoring at intervals is what > tell the board and us that the policy is having desired effect or not. > > Thank to your input, I just realise that those things that board > monitors is what I am looking for. Making these public on a website so > the community can see will address the concern and improve confidence > in the board. > > > > > > -- > Borg le Chevalier > ___________________________________ > "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Dec 29 08:39:55 2015 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 11:39:55 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: <315609D9-3858-4228-9851-CEC7E1209D62@delong.com> References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> <315609D9-3858-4228-9851-CEC7E1209D62@delong.com> Message-ID: 1. Membership to the board has never been permanent as different individuals are elected to the board at different times from different regions with different interests. 2. Considering the strategic plans that where set years ago? - Have the goals been met this far? - What has been achieved by both the board and the organisation since the plans were defined? - If we where to go back to those goals and evaluate each of them, would we then be able to measure the performance of the board and the executives? PS: Answers can only come out of the previous approved strategic plan which contained the defined vision and goals of the organisation and how they would be achieved. Its not by looking at those goals that we can evaluate the board and the executive as far as performance is concerned.... Noah On 29 Dec 2015 11:15, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > >> That?s very hard to do. If you ask 10 different people what the AfriNIC > board > >> should have as their number 1 priority, you may well get as many as 12 > different > >> answers. > > > > > > hard but not impossible. one way or another, board agrees on some > > priority and its fruit/result can only become evident in 1 - 2 years > > time. i am interested in the simple weekly rituals board engages in to > > makes sure that priority will be attained and/or if it should be > > adapted. > > > > > > very rough example: > > > > priority: i want to publish a book by 2017 > > > > a good indicator (predictor?) can be: how many words do i force myself > > to write every day/week > > > > logic being if someone is consistent in writing a 500 word every day, > > they are more likely to achieve the goal of writing enough for a book > > Sure, but you?re missing the idea of how a board is supposed to work. > > In this case, you?re talking about how well a goal is executed. > > That is how you evaluate the CEO and the staff. Evaluating the board > involves > a determination if the goal that they directed the CEO to pursue was the > correct > goal for the membership and the community. Further, one wants to evaluate > whether > the board gave the CEO the tools/authority/latitude/resources necessary to > execute > those goals. > > Now wha I?ve said in the preceding paragraph may be controversial to some. > I don?t > have an MBA or any sort of credential, so just following my ideas blindly > probably > isn?t the best thing to do. > > However, that?s my best understanding of the role of a board and how they > should be > evaluated. > > If you evaluate the board on execution, then a good staff and CEO will > cover very > well for a lousy board and you can get fantastic execution of really bad > goals and > plans. > > Definitely not what this community needs IMHO. > > >> As I have said a few times in this thread, attempting to dictate the > basis on which > >> others evaluate board candidates is unlikely to produce a useful result. > > > > > > I agree with you. I am not asking for criteria to evaluate individual > > candidates, rather looking for ways to evaluate performance of the > > board as the whole which you go into below :-) > > Well? Actually I intended that to be guidelines about how I go about > evaluating the > performance of individual candidates. OTOH, boards are small enough groups > that it?s > hard to separate individual performance from group performance. If one > individual is > not performing well, they will drag down the whole body. If the body is > performing > well, then it?s a pretty good indication that each of the members is also > performing > well. > > >> If you are asking for advice on how you should evaluate board member > performance, > >> then I would suggest the following: > >> > >> 1. Consider what you think should be the primary things AfriNIC > focuses on. > >> 2. Look at the minutes of board meetings and voting record of > board members. > >> 3. Compare the data from item 2 to your thoughts on item 1 and > decide > >> whether you feel that the actions in item 2 match the goals in > item 1 or not. > > > > > > this is a reasonable place to start with the caution that what afrinic > > focuses on determine largely by it strategic plan. not sure if that is > > responsibility of board or ceo but i assume board must at least > > approve a plan produce by staff. so in a way, community can hold board > > for ensure that the strategy is fit where afrinic want to go. > > The strategic plan is the responsibility of the board, but remember, the > CEO > is a member of the board and he should definitely have a lot of input in > that > process. > > Think of it like this? The board is the steering committee. The > visionaries. > They have the responsibility to select the destination and set the mission > goals. > > The CEO and the staff are the captain and crew of the ship. They have the > responsibility to chart the course and steer the ship safely to the > destination > while achieving the other mission goals along the way. > > > so, i what about following informations that are tracked and reported > > regularly on public website and at meetings > > > > a) Monthly or quarterly board meeting attendance record i.e. % of > > board members that attend each meeting not who attended or did not > > attend > > Contained in the minutes. > > > b) Number of resolutions > > Contained in the minutes > > > c) Voting record on various issue raise in board meeting > > Should be contained in the minutes. > > > d) Issues of focus (as determine from resolutions/minute i.e.) will > > tell us what board spend most of their time on > > Should be contained in the minutes. > > > as you indicate above, these actions above here should correlate to > > achieving the priorities. if they don't ... then something wrong. > > also combination of priorities should get afrinic towards its mission > > (better service to region, financial sustainabilite, etc etc) ...if > > not then priorities are wrong > > Yep. > > > i admit board job is voluntaire so we cannot measure thing out of normal > duties. > > A volunteer job should be evaluated like any other job. Sure, to get > volunteers to > continue to work as volunteers, sometimes you have to cut them some slack > or provide > some perks as incentive. In my case, ARIN treats me very well and I get > some pretty > nice travel opportunities as part of my service to the ARIN community. > OTOH, I don?t > expect that I am not held to a high standard of work in what I do there > just because > I am a volunteer. Indeed, I would not even hope to get re-elected if I was > not doing a > good job of representing the ARIN members that elected me. > > >>> should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of > governance > >>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in > >>> hand. > >> > >> The devil is in the details here. We should not, IMHO, make the board > accountable > >> to a committee that effectively serves at the pleasure of the board. > That creates > >> a number of conflicts of interest around how the committee is selected, > how > >> the committee performs its duties and how the committee can communicate > >> with the community and the membership. > > > > > > +100 governance council in my opinion should come from community & > > members and report to community and members and not board. the council > > can then use a set of measures like suggested above (plus others) to > > do their work. > > I disagree. Setting up a secondary committee that takes direction from the > membership (and/or community) is a recipe for disaster and fractious > dysfunction > throughout the organization. It?s like hiring two captains to pilot a ship > and > then having one of them report to the owners of the ship and having the > other > one report to the passengers. No good can come of that. > > >> The governance committee, IMHO, should be focused on issues of process > and > >> procedure to ensure that the processes and procedures in place are > serving the > >> community and provide adequate controls to ensure that the governance of > >> AfriNIC does not stray too far from the ideals of the community without > the > >> community being able to apply necessary corrections. > > > > indicators will be > > > > - how many times was process A executed this year > > - how many times was there violation/compliance > > Not really. Those metrics don?t really tell you anything. > > It?s quite a bit more complicated than that and if simple metrics would > tell us > what we needed to know, we wouldn?t need a committee to sort the issues > out. > > > uhhhh. ....... seems like lot of work ..... but that's price of good > > governance. > > Yes? It?s even more work than you think, but, yes, it is the price of good > governance. > > Owen > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From virtual.borg at gmail.com Tue Dec 29 09:52:41 2015 From: virtual.borg at gmail.com (Chevalier du Borg) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 13:52:41 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: <315609D9-3858-4228-9851-CEC7E1209D62@delong.com> References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> <315609D9-3858-4228-9851-CEC7E1209D62@delong.com> Message-ID: 2015-12-29 12:13 GMT+04:00 Owen DeLong : > > In this case, you?re talking about how well a goal is executed. > correct. but there's a goal that board sets for company for company to execute. but don't you think board himself have some goal which it executes? just for clarify: i don't think you should evaluate board based on execution within the company. > That is how you evaluate the CEO and the staff. Evaluating the board involves > a determination if the goal that they directed the CEO to pursue was the correct > goal for the membership and the community. agree 100%. i'm just wondering IF it is possible and not just in the 2 - 3 years it take for strategic plan to be implemented. > Further, one wants to evaluate whether > the board gave the CEO the tools/authority/latitude/resources necessary to execute > those goals. > > Now wha I?ve said in the preceding paragraph may be controversial to some. I don?t > have an MBA or any sort of credential, so just following my ideas blindly probably > isn?t the best thing to do. MBAs are useful ... or not .... [1] :-) > >>>> should we add that check and balance formally to responsabilite of governance >>>> committee? i belief good performance and good governance go hand in >>>> hand. >>> >>> The devil is in the details here. We should not, IMHO, make the board accountable >>> to a committee that effectively serves at the pleasure of the board. That creates >>> a number of conflicts of interest around how the committee is selected, how >>> the committee performs its duties and how the committee can communicate >>> with the community and the membership. >> >> >> +100 governance council in my opinion should come from community & >> members and report to community and members and not board. the council >> can then use a set of measures like suggested above (plus others) to >> do their work. > > I disagree. Setting up a secondary committee that takes direction from the > membership (and/or community) is a recipe for disaster and fractious dysfunction > throughout the organization. It?s like hiring two captains to pilot a ship and > then having one of them report to the owners of the ship and having the other > one report to the passengers. No good can come of that. Point taken ... i'd rather have vigilant passengers > > Yes? It?s even more work than you think, but, yes, it is the price of good > governance. are we ready to do that work? -- Borg le Chevalier ___________________________________ "Common sense is what tells us the world is flat" [1] "Managers, Not MBAs" - http://video.mit.edu/watch/managers-not-mbas-debating-the-merits-of-business-education-9966/ From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Dec 29 10:06:10 2015 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 29 Dec 2015 13:06:10 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Evaluating Performance of the Board In-Reply-To: References: <5363B262-FE7B-495D-8681-F6D4D2E9BE03@delong.com> <315609D9-3858-4228-9851-CEC7E1209D62@delong.com> Message-ID: On 29 Dec 2015 12:54, "Chevalier du Borg" wrote: > > 2015-12-29 12:13 GMT+04:00 Owen DeLong : > > > > In this case, you?re talking about how well a goal is executed. > > > > correct. but there's a goal that board sets for company for company to > execute. but don't you think board himself have some goal which it > executes? > Once the board has set the strategy... the company would of course execute it. The role of the board would then be to monitor the execution and evaluate if the set goals or vision are being met by the company. [1]... In this case the board does performs the role of setting the strategy and then monitoring to ensure its expectations are met rather than set the strategy and then seat back expecting the technocrats would do a great job. [1] set, monitor and evaluate the strategy of the company is the boards role in a nutshell... IMHO.... Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: