From chii.ngek at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 08:13:15 2016 From: chii.ngek at gmail.com (Augustine CHII Ngek) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:13:15 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities In-Reply-To: <69f28c1c-b7bd-1cec-49a1-1d071531488c@gmail.com> References: <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za> <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20160627094342.0c64cc28@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20160627114130.0ca1c670@elandnews.com> <69f28c1c-b7bd-1cec-49a1-1d071531488c@gmail.com> Message-ID: Good day, This topic of interest to me. If there are statistics in our region concerning this topic please I will like to have them for I am preparing a presentation about it right now. Augustin CHII On 30 Jun 2016 07:31, "Jean-Robert Hountomey" wrote: > Thanks. Everyone. I haven't received any response from AfriNIC as an > organization but I have enough information. > > Thanks. > > Jean-Robert > > > On 6/27/16 11:56 AM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: > > Hi Amresh, > > At 11:36 27-06-2016, Amreesh Phokeer wrote: > >> I am pretty sure there is something wrong with the "Dutch" RPKI > >> dashboard. I'd recommend the NIST dashboard rather: > > > > Thank you for the URL. > > > > I was verifying some information about IPv4 addresses and I noticed > > some valid ROAs for IPv4 addresses from Afrinic. The information > > currently on the dashboard doesn't seem correct. > > > > Regards, > > S. Moonesamy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RPD mailing list > > RPD at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 honest1989 at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 09:49:28 2016 From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:49:28 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: Hello Owen, Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? Honest Ornella GANKPA Network engineer 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong : > Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the > senate > is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations > bill), we?ll > be all set. > > Owen > > On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah wrote: > > Yes this is indeed progress... > > Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... > > Noah > On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" wrote: > >> Hello all, >> >> >> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >> >> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >> >> This is a good example. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 kmw.elitcha at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 10:12:46 2016 From: kmw.elitcha at gmail.com (abel ELITCHA) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:12:46 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: Good!!!! I really hope things are under control. Thank. --Komi 2016-07-01 9:49 GMT+00:00 Honest Ornella GANKPA : > Hello Owen, > > Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can > the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such > a bill is passed? > > Honest Ornella GANKPA > Network engineer > > > 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong : > >> Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which >> the senate >> is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations >> bill), we?ll >> be all set. >> >> Owen >> >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah wrote: >> >> Yes this is indeed progress... >> >> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >> >> Noah >> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" wrote: >> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> >>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >>> >>> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >>> >>> This is a good example. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > -- Best regards, --Komi A. Elitcha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From silber.mike at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 10:16:36 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 12:16:36 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: <4CF9EC9A-B87A-4FAC-9167-6B1D7D5C59D4@gmail.com> Honest Individual congresspeople add riders on to spending bills in other areas when they cannot get traction for their demands in the committee having oversight. It is a form of coercion that tries to tie getting money (in this case for defence spending) only on condition that x is done or y is not done. It ?wraps? the request into a bigger issue in the hope that it gets lost in there. This is even more of an issue in the ?lame duck? period before the election and inauguration of a new president. The community has done a very good job of avoiding this lunacy in the commerce committee through strong testimony at the hearing (and a fair bit of lobbying). The community can (and should) also demand that the changes agreed as part of this process should be implemented irrespective of any US government restrictions. However, they must also accept that if the rider process succeeds - then certain implementation steps will be suspended. Still, the vast majority of what has been agreed will not be impacted. This makes for some interesting reading https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/20160627_-_ntia_response_iana_-_rubio.pdf Mike > On 1 Jul 2016, at 11:49, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > Hello Owen, > > Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? > > Honest Ornella GANKPA > Network engineer > > > 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong >: > Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate > is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll > be all set. > > Owen > >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah > wrote: >> >> Yes this is indeed progress... >> >> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >> >> Noah >> >> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" > wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >> >> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >> >> This is a good example. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 silber.mike at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 10:24:33 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 12:24:33 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: > On 1 Jul 2016, at 12:12, abel ELITCHA wrote: > > Good!!!! > I really hope things are under control. Not if this guy has anything to do with it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrWHeVy003c From noah at neo.co.tz Fri Jul 1 10:29:07 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 13:29:07 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Mike Silber wrote: > > > On 1 Jul 2016, at 12:12, abel ELITCHA wrote: > > > > Good!!!! > > I really hope things are under control. > > Not if this guy has anything to do with it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrWHeVy003c > > Lol, whoever wrote for him that script.... But those are politicians for you. They are the same everywhere. -- *Noah* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 10:42:58 2016 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 13:42:58 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: Hello Honest, There is a request to not spend the NTIA budget on transition and also a few members of the house are pushing against the transition but I understand it may not be a major thing to worry about(will leave it to Owen to say if it's been more significant lately). As to what we can do, there is really noting except to use every opportunity to remind the USG that the stewardship transition was their plan and the multistakeholder community has delivered on their part of the task based on USG's plan. It will be in the interest of USG to keep to her plan. The Africann/AFRALO community indicated this in their recent statement: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2016-June/011609.html Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 1 Jul 2016 12:50, "Honest Ornella GANKPA" wrote: > Hello Owen, > > Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can > the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such > a bill is passed? > > Honest Ornella GANKPA > Network engineer > > > 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong : > >> Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which >> the senate >> is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations >> bill), we?ll >> be all set. >> >> Owen >> >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah wrote: >> >> Yes this is indeed progress... >> >> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >> >> Noah >> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" wrote: >> >>> Hello all, >>> >>> >>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >>> >>> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >>> >>> This is a good example. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 Fri Jul 1 17:46:57 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:46:57 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: <6D185309-DA62-4025-8BCB-BF981C9BD99C@delong.com> Standard Ted Cruz style stupdiity? https://fcw.com/articles/2016/06/03/cruz-iana-bill.aspx Owen > On Jul 1, 2016, at 02:49 , Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > Hello Owen, > > Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? > > Honest Ornella GANKPA > Network engineer > > > 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong >: > Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate > is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll > be all set. > > Owen > >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah > wrote: >> >> Yes this is indeed progress... >> >> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >> >> Noah >> >> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" > wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >> >> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >> >> This is a good example. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 madomey at hotmail.com Fri Jul 1 17:49:18 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 17:49:18 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Serge, >From the link of APNIC you provided, ( https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule ) checked the list of the least developed least countries maintained by United Nations (UN) ( http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm#least ) I have counted 34 African countries on the 54 we have which is about 63% This figure is speaking about itself if we have to consider what APNIC is doing. Thanks Marcus Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:53:13 +0100 From: sergekbk at gmail.com To: randy at psg.com; diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng CC: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees Hello Diana, Actually each RIR set the fees model which fit it's region and its community needs. So nothing wrong with your suggestion at all. For the case of our region, AFRINIC already gives 50% discount to NREN's and also waives fees for critical infrastructures like IXP's. In fact, other RIR like APNIC treat members in least developped countries differently. See link below. https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule BOD and Executive will have to see if this can fit our AFRINIC region needs and report to the community. Kind Regards. Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Randy Bush Date: 06/30/2016 05:00 (GMT+01:00) To: Diana Ikwuagwu Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be > lowered. Please let the board look into this. i strongly agree. afrninc should pay us to take address space from them. this would make my business a bit easier. fwiw, i believe fees are set by the boards (or equivalents) of all the other rirs. the board, and execs, are responsible that income meets expenses. and with responsibility must go authority. has no one noticed the british insanity in which the country eats its children? i am hoping that the states does not follow. there is no need for the afrinic community to do so. randy _______________________________________________ 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 Fri Jul 1 18:02:06 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 11:02:06 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: Mike Silber covered it pretty well? There?s no real traction to block it, but the concern is if it gets buried in a rider on another bill. Owen > On Jul 1, 2016, at 03:42 , Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > Hello Honest, > > There is a request to not spend the NTIA budget on transition and also a few members of the house are pushing against the transition but I understand it may not be a major thing to worry about(will leave it to Owen to say if it's been more significant lately). > > As to what we can do, there is really noting except to use every opportunity to remind the USG that the stewardship transition was their plan and the multistakeholder community has delivered on their part of the task based on USG's plan. It will be in the interest of USG to keep to her plan. The Africann/AFRALO community indicated this in their recent statement: > > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2016-June/011609.html > Regards > > Sent from my LG G4 > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > > On 1 Jul 2016 12:50, "Honest Ornella GANKPA" > wrote: > Hello Owen, > > Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? > > Honest Ornella GANKPA > Network engineer > > > 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong >: > Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate > is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll > be all set. > > Owen > >> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah > wrote: >> >> Yes this is indeed progress... >> >> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >> >> Noah >> >> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" > wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >> >> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >> >> This is a good example. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jul 1 18:26:59 2016 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 21:26:59 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: Yes indeed! Overall I will expect the congress would not be unaware of what they are approving. FWIW, for numbers community there won't be significant change if congress stall the transition since they have always handled their accountability independent of ICANN. However it's a big deal for names community as irrespective of the transition, an ICANN 3.0 is in the making and it's good that ICANN board agreed to proceed with the non-transition dependent part of the proposal irrespective of the outcome from USG. Regards Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 1 Jul 2016 9:03 p.m., "Owen DeLong" wrote: > Mike Silber covered it pretty well? There?s no real traction to block it, > but the concern is if it gets buried in a rider on another bill. > > Owen > > On Jul 1, 2016, at 03:42 , Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > Hello Honest, > > There is a request to not spend the NTIA budget on transition and also a > few members of the house are pushing against the transition but I > understand it may not be a major thing to worry about(will leave it to Owen > to say if it's been more significant lately). > > As to what we can do, there is really noting except to use every > opportunity to remind the USG that the stewardship transition was their > plan and the multistakeholder community has delivered on their part of the > task based on USG's plan. It will be in the interest of USG to keep to her > plan. The Africann/AFRALO community indicated this in their recent > statement: > > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2016-June/011609.html > > Regards > > Sent from my LG G4 > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > On 1 Jul 2016 12:50, "Honest Ornella GANKPA" wrote: > >> Hello Owen, >> >> Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can >> the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such >> a bill is passed? >> >> Honest Ornella GANKPA >> Network engineer >> >> >> 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong : >> >>> Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which >>> the senate >>> is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations >>> bill), we?ll >>> be all set. >>> >>> Owen >>> >>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah wrote: >>> >>> Yes this is indeed progress... >>> >>> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >>> >>> Noah >>> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" wrote: >>> >>>> Hello all, >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >>>> >>>> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >>>> >>>> This is a good example. >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jul 1 19:38:07 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 12:38:07 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> Message-ID: <44196A24-BB71-441F-9161-9C03C124B73E@delong.com> > On Jul 1, 2016, at 11:26 , Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > Yes indeed! Overall I will expect the congress would not be unaware of what they are approving. > Then your experience with US Congress is rather limited. > FWIW, for numbers community there won't be significant change if congress stall the transition since they have always handled their accountability independent of ICANN. > > However it's a big deal for names community as irrespective of the transition, an ICANN 3.0 is in the making and it's good that ICANN board agreed to proceed with the non-transition dependent part of the proposal irrespective of the outcome from USG. > > Regards > > Sent from my LG G4 > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > > Yes, I expect that other than making USG look really bad, congress can?t really do too much harm directly. My concern is that if congress goes back on promises made by USG once again, there may be a fracturous move to proceed with transition that gets traction in at least some part of the community and essentially declares ICANN irrelevant for the cooperating parts of the community whoever that may comprise. This would be the worst possible outcome. Owen > On 1 Jul 2016 9:03 p.m., "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > Mike Silber covered it pretty well? There?s no real traction to block it, but the concern is if it gets buried in a rider on another bill. > > Owen > >> On Jul 1, 2016, at 03:42 , Seun Ojedeji > wrote: >> >> Hello Honest, >> >> There is a request to not spend the NTIA budget on transition and also a few members of the house are pushing against the transition but I understand it may not be a major thing to worry about(will leave it to Owen to say if it's been more significant lately). >> >> As to what we can do, there is really noting except to use every opportunity to remind the USG that the stewardship transition was their plan and the multistakeholder community has delivered on their part of the task based on USG's plan. It will be in the interest of USG to keep to her plan. The Africann/AFRALO community indicated this in their recent statement: >> >> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2016-June/011609.html >> Regards >> >> Sent from my LG G4 >> Kindly excuse brevity and typos >> >> On 1 Jul 2016 12:50, "Honest Ornella GANKPA" > wrote: >> Hello Owen, >> >> Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? >> >> Honest Ornella GANKPA >> Network engineer >> >> >> 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong >: >> Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate >> is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll >> be all set. >> >> Owen >> >>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah > wrote: >>> >>> Yes this is indeed progress... >>> >>> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >>> >>> Noah >>> >>> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" > wrote: >>> Hello all, >>> >>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >>> >>> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >>> >>> This is a good example. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 20:26:35 2016 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 23:26:35 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: <44196A24-BB71-441F-9161-9C03C124B73E@delong.com> References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> <44196A24-BB71-441F-9161-9C03C124B73E@delong.com> Message-ID: Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 1 Jul 2016 22:40, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > >> On Jul 1, 2016, at 11:26 , Seun Ojedeji wrote: >> >> Yes indeed! Overall I will expect the congress would not be unaware of what they are approving. > > > Then your experience with US Congress is rather limited. > SO: Yes indeed, I will not claim to have good experience of US politics! Though my point was that quite significant number of people is following happenings so any possible actions or racketing that could stall process would have received significant information to educate any congressman not aware of possible implications of what they are about to do. Overall a decision to stall the transition would indeed be intentional as every effort would have been made to educate the "possibly" ignorant congressmen. The hearing referred to by Mike was one of those avenues that I think served as a good educating platform to them. >> >> > > My concern is that if congress goes back on promises made by USG once again, there may be a fracturous move to proceed with transition that gets traction in at least some part of the community and essentially declares ICANN irrelevant for the cooperating parts of the community whoever that may comprise. > SO: Yup that's a possible implication which we all hope it doesn't get to. > This would be the worst possible outcome. > SO: Yes Indeed Regards > Owen > >> On 1 Jul 2016 9:03 p.m., "Owen DeLong" wrote: >>> >>> Mike Silber covered it pretty well? There?s no real traction to block it, but the concern is if it gets buried in a rider on another bill. >>> >>> Owen >>> >>>> On Jul 1, 2016, at 03:42 , Seun Ojedeji wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello Honest, >>>> >>>> There is a request to not spend the NTIA budget on transition and also a few members of the house are pushing against the transition but I understand it may not be a major thing to worry about(will leave it to Owen to say if it's been more significant lately). >>>> >>>> As to what we can do, there is really noting except to use every opportunity to remind the USG that the stewardship transition was their plan and the multistakeholder community has delivered on their part of the task based on USG's plan. It will be in the interest of USG to keep to her plan. The Africann/AFRALO community indicated this in their recent statement: >>>> >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2016-June/011609.html >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Sent from my LG G4 >>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos >>>> >>>> On 1 Jul 2016 12:50, "Honest Ornella GANKPA" wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hello Owen, >>>>> >>>>> Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? >>>>> >>>>> Honest Ornella GANKPA >>>>> Network engineer >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong : >>>>>> >>>>>> Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate >>>>>> is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll >>>>>> be all set. >>>>>> >>>>>> Owen >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes this is indeed progress... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Noah >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hello all, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a good example. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 Fri Jul 1 22:07:06 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:07:06 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> <44196A24-BB71-441F-9161-9C03C124B73E@delong.com> Message-ID: <755BEEAB-3A41-488C-BADA-D90639378179@delong.com> > On Jul 1, 2016, at 13:26 , Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > Sent from my LG G4 > Kindly excuse brevity and typos > On 1 Jul 2016 22:40, "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > > > > > >> On Jul 1, 2016, at 11:26 , Seun Ojedeji > wrote: > >> > >> Yes indeed! Overall I will expect the congress would not be unaware of what they are approving. > > > > > > Then your experience with US Congress is rather limited. > > > SO: Yes indeed, I will not claim to have good experience of US politics! Though my point was that quite significant number of people is following happenings so any possible actions or racketing that could stall process would have received significant information to educate any congressman not aware of possible implications of what they are about to do. > That?s the whole point of riders? They are amendments often rushed in at the last second in an attempt to drive a micro-agenda with limited support through despite opposition by depending on the momentum of the larger bill to which they get attached. I?m hoping there is enough scrutiny to prevent it, but my faith in the ability of our legislators to do the wrong thing in most cases is nearly boundless. > Overall a decision to stall the transition would indeed be intentional as every effort would have been made to educate the "possibly" ignorant congressmen. The hearing referred to by Mike was one of those avenues that I think served as a good educating platform to them. > Absolutely, but that?s not what we?re talking about here with riders. Riders are tiny amendments that get tacked onto bills at the last minute. Often, it seems, most of the members voting on it are only looking at the larger bill and many riders go through without really being noticed, even when there is strong opposition to the actual content of the rider. Owen > >> > >> > > > > My concern is that if congress goes back on promises made by USG once again, there may be a fracturous move to proceed with transition that gets traction in at least some part of the community and essentially declares ICANN irrelevant for the cooperating parts of the community whoever that may comprise. > > > SO: Yup that's a possible implication which we all hope it doesn't get to. > > > This would be the worst possible outcome. > > > > SO: Yes Indeed > > Regards > > Owen > > > >> On 1 Jul 2016 9:03 p.m., "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > >>> > >>> Mike Silber covered it pretty well? There?s no real traction to block it, but the concern is if it gets buried in a rider on another bill. > >>> > >>> Owen > >>> > >>>> On Jul 1, 2016, at 03:42 , Seun Ojedeji > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hello Honest, > >>>> > >>>> There is a request to not spend the NTIA budget on transition and also a few members of the house are pushing against the transition but I understand it may not be a major thing to worry about(will leave it to Owen to say if it's been more significant lately). > >>>> > >>>> As to what we can do, there is really noting except to use every opportunity to remind the USG that the stewardship transition was their plan and the multistakeholder community has delivered on their part of the task based on USG's plan. It will be in the interest of USG to keep to her plan. The Africann/AFRALO community indicated this in their recent statement: > >>>> > >>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/africann/2016-June/011609.html > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> > >>>> Sent from my LG G4 > >>>> Kindly excuse brevity and typos > >>>> > >>>> On 1 Jul 2016 12:50, "Honest Ornella GANKPA" > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> Hello Owen, > >>>>> > >>>>> Can you explain further what the US congress is trying to do? What can the Internet community do to avoid seeing community efforts wasted if such a bill is passed? > >>>>> > >>>>> Honest Ornella GANKPA > >>>>> Network engineer > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 2016-06-30 21:47 GMT+01:00 Owen DeLong >: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Now if we can just avoid the US Congress doing something stupid (which the senate > >>>>>> is already trying todo through an amendment to a defense appropriations bill), we?ll > >>>>>> be all set. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Owen > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Jun 30, 2016, at 10:15 , Noah > wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Yes this is indeed progress... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Congrats to the CRISP and ICANN teams.... > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Noah > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 30 Jun 2016 17:18, "Danny" > wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Hello all, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/library/news/1805-icann-and-regional-internet-registries-sign-sla-for-the-iana-numbering-services > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Congratulations to CRISP and ICANN teams. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This is a good example. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>>>> 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 > >>>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Jul 2 02:12:15 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 02:12:15 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> , Message-ID: <2594CB19-48BC-4727-BFC8-8E2C38457F13@nftconsult.com> On 1 Jul 2016, at 1:29 pm, Noah > wrote: On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Mike Silber > Not if this guy has anything to do with it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrWHeVy003c Lol, whoever wrote for him that script.... But those are politicians for you. They are the same everywhere. And they call us the third world. Well that's what you get with free speech. Anyone can publish anything. But he lost to Trump not sure if we should be worried :-) -- Noah _______________________________________________ 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 Jul 2 09:29:05 2016 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:29:05 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, The other thing we perhaps should note is that the membership size differs significantly[1]. AFRINIC does indeed give discount for certain categories of members which are not also existing in other RIRs. Overall, while we may observe the trends in other regions they may not necessarily be applicable in our environment. Regards 1. https://www.apnic.net/get-ip/apnic-membership/who-are-our-members Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 1 Jul 2016 20:49, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" wrote: > Hi Serge, > > From the link of APNIC you provided, ( > https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule > ) checked the list of the least developed least countries maintained by > United Nations (UN) ( > http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm#least ) I have > counted 34 African countries on the 54 we have which is about 63% > > This figure is speaking about itself if we have to consider what APNIC is > doing. > > Thanks > > > Marcus > > ------------------------------ > Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:53:13 +0100 > From: sergekbk at gmail.com > To: randy at psg.com; diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng > CC: community-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > > Hello Diana, > > Actually each RIR set the fees model which fit it's region and its > community needs. So nothing wrong with your suggestion at all. > > For the case of our region, AFRINIC already gives 50% discount to NREN's > and also waives fees for critical infrastructures like IXP's. > > In fact, other RIR like APNIC treat members in least developped countries > differently. See link below. > > > https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule > > BOD and Executive will have to see if this can fit our AFRINIC region > needs and report to the community. > > Kind Regards. > > *Serge Ilunga* > *Cell: +243814443160 <%2B243814443160>* > *Skype: sergekbk* > *R.D.Congo* > -------- Original message -------- > From: Randy Bush > Date: 06/30/2016 05:00 (GMT+01:00) > To: Diana Ikwuagwu > Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > > > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be > > lowered. Please let the board look into this. > > > i strongly agree. afrninc should pay us to take address space from > them. this would make my business a bit easier. > > > fwiw, i believe fees are set by the boards (or equivalents) of all the > other rirs. the board, and execs, are responsible that income meets > expenses. and with responsibility must go authority. > > has no one noticed the british insanity in which the country eats its > children? i am hoping that the states does not follow. there is no > need for the afrinic community to do so. > > randy > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat Jul 2 18:45:30 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 11:45:30 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: <2594CB19-48BC-4727-BFC8-8E2C38457F13@nftconsult.com> References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> <2594CB19-48BC-4727-BFC8-8E2C38457F13@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 1, 2016, at 19:12 , Badru Ntege wrote: > > > > On 1 Jul 2016, at 1:29 pm, Noah > wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Mike Silber > >> >> Not if this guy has anything to do with it. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrWHeVy003c >> >> >> Lol, whoever wrote for him that script.... >> >> But those are politicians for you. They are the same everywhere. > > And they call us the third world. Well that's what you get with free speech. Anyone can publish anything. > > But he lost to Trump not sure if we should be worried :-) He?s still a senator. We should be worried. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Sat Jul 2 20:14:18 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 23:14:18 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] ICANN and RIRs signed SLA for IANA numbering services post transition In-Reply-To: References: <51A92C33-84F3-4397-BA43-95EE80172974@delong.com> <2594CB19-48BC-4727-BFC8-8E2C38457F13@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > On Jul 1, 2016, at 19:12 , Badru Ntege wrote: > > > > On 1 Jul 2016, at 1:29 pm, Noah wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Mike Silber >> >> >> Not if this guy has anything to do with it. >> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrWHeVy003c >> >> > Lol, whoever wrote for him that script.... > > But those are politicians for you. They are the same everywhere. > > > And they call us the third world. Well that's what you get with free > speech. Anyone can publish anything. > > But he lost to Trump not sure if we should be worried :-) > > > He's even more controversial ... considering the internet of things is not real estate. > He?s still a senator. We should be worried. > > Not really, I would actually dare him and we see if folk at the valley who benefit from global numbers will take it lightly... > Owen > > Noah -- *./noah* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sergekbk at gmail.com Sun Jul 3 08:33:58 2016 From: sergekbk at gmail.com (sergekbk) Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2016 09:33:58 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment Message-ID: Agree with Omo except on >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members. >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be. Proposal : ?One term and at least an election before another nomination Agree with term limit, I would suggest at least 2 terms before another nomination. Kind Regards. Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Omo Oaiya Date: 06/28/2016 14:20 (GMT+01:00) To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett wrote: Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified. The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016. I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved.? Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list.? In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified). Alan Barrett CEO, AFRINIC Thanks Alan.? Comments below >>>1 ...... ?but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another. We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent.? Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe. ? Supported: Associate members observe. >>>2.? Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius. SupportedSupported. >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies Act as members of the company. Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered.? Supported, we shall move to a more community oriented model. >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members. >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be. Proposal : ?One term and at least an election before another nominationAgree with term limit, I would suggest at least 2 terms before another nomination. >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation. ? >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be. We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must.? I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have - ?Max 1 per org/company - ?Max 1 per country ?- Max 2 ?per region ?- Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country. - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered; ?- not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region.? Fully supported. >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation. Supported Supported. >>>7.? Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest. Supported.? In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it.? Supported? >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person. Supported Supported? >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give ?different methods of replacing Directors for ?different reasons. Consider ?harmonising this. Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM.? I support a replacement process through AGMM. >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove ?nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM.? NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved. ? We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased. ?? The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for proper NOMCOM operation. Agree that we have to strengthen NomCom. >>>11- ?Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the ?Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the ?Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members?(the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval. Registered members only MUST never amend ?the bylaws.? Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation. ? The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation Supported. >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board. Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this.? In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies. 11.5: ?Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting.? Best wishes --? Omo Oaiya CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN? Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224 Skype: kodion http://www.wacren.net? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From silber.mike at gmail.com Mon Jul 4 09:43:35 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 11:43:35 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] FW: [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <24972ACE-1FAF-44F1-B483-10784EB14924@nftconsult.com> References: <177FD5F8-7B1B-45CE-81D3-D87D5207625C@liquidtelecom.com> <24972ACE-1FAF-44F1-B483-10784EB14924@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: My ZAR0,02 below (at the current exchange rate - you decide what it is worth) > On 29 Jun 2016, at 00:39, Badru Ntege wrote: >> >> >>> >>>1 ...... but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another. >>> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision > > Following discussion in a separate thread if resource member includes legacy holders I think they should not vote. They are either fully in or out. They hold on to resources out of Afrinic and do not want to share or return and yet they want to take part in the governance by paying a measly fee. I see no reason for associate members, so the question of voting is moot. If they remain - then I would leave them as non-voting. As for legacy holders - I agree they should not vote. However the comments come pretty close to a suggestion of compelling them - which would amount to expropriation. They obtained resources under a specific process which has passed. I see no reason for people to be vindictive. If we want legacy members as full members - them let us create incentives and not threaten them. > >> >> Agree with term limits ? would not however support a single term ? there has to be some continuity and it takes any director time to get up to speed with everything in the organization as well. Two terms with a two term break seems far more reasonable to me, and I would support such >> > > Fully diasgree if it takes time I think NOMCOM then needs to be more thorough in the selection process. I agree about Noncom actively searching for candidates and not just a simple vetting process (do they meet the criteria). Some budget may be needed for outreach (and no - I am not suggesting we pay the Noncom to travel the continent, but rather some targeted advertising and possibly engaging a search firm). > The region has a wealth of highly intelligent people capable of grasping the board expectations in a very short time. I agree. The problem is how many of them have an understanding of numbering resources and how many of them are willing to put in the time and effort required without compensation? Having served on a number of non-profit boards, intelligence has little to nothing to do with grasping fiduciary obligations of a director. Actually common-sense and experience are (IMO at least) far more important. The pool of experienced directors with an understanding of technology, law, finance, governance and the obligations of being a director are far smaller than the pool of intelligent people. Again my opinion - we need to assist intelligent people to get the skills they need to be effective directors. Some of it is training and some of it is experience. Right now - there are very places in which to gain that experience. In AfriNIC is is pretty much as PDWG co-chair. Suggestions most welcome. > The above suggests we are presented with incapable candidates to choose from which I fully disagree with. There is no need to be dramatic here. There is no suggestion of the capability of candidates, but rather the benefits that continuity and experience bring. Also the relatively shallow pool of candidates from which we are selecting. So we need a careful balancing between new blood and experience, continuity and incumbency. > > The proposal of One term and at least an election before another nomination is perfect. I think a 2 term limit with a 3 year break is in fact preferable. I would not want to see candidates bouncing between geographic and non-geographic without a reasonable break. Still - I can accept the proposal. >>> >>> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation. >>> > > In a region of over 1 billion people and 53 countries the above submission would seem very weak. Lets invest in finding those people. > > To put this in context we are looking for 0.000000009 % from a population point of view and 17% from a countries point of view. Surely we can and should increase our outreach efforts. > Again, you are being disingenuous. Of that 1 billion people, how many of them have a clue how the numbering system works and have some legal, commercial, financial or governance experience? I could nominate my mother to the board and while she is a wonderful, kind, honest and fair person - she would be totally unable to fulfil her fiduciary obligations. By all means, let us expand our outreach - but let us also not kid ourselves that we are selecting directors from a pool of a billion people. I think 2 per organisation and 2 per country (excluding the CEO) is a reasonable protection from capture. I could be convinced that it should be only 1 per organisation - but I would like a more compelling reason. Right now I have not seen any. >>> >>> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different reasons. Consider harmonising this. >> >> > Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. >> >> Supported ? though I would add SGM as a possibility for replacement. In the event of losing multiple directors at a single time through some unforeseen event it may become necessary to call an SGM for this purpose and the bylaws need to allow for it. The risk of tying this to an AGMM is that the board could be down to a skeleton for close to a year if we don?t allow for SGM?s. > > > Secretariat runs the organisation. Board is just oversight. No need for SGMM. I think we are blowing board value out of proportion. I see no harm in inserting the ability to use a SGM. If half the board decide to resign after the elections because someone they cannot work with is elected, I don?t think the organisation can limp for a year and a mechanism should be available. Hopefully it is never used. > >> >>> >>> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination >> >> > We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM. NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved. We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting >> > members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased. >> >> I agree with the original proposal that states a super majority. I believe that the board should have the right to reject candidates if certain situations. > > > Problem with the above is that ?certain situations? is so subjective. Could be used to manipulate selection pool. Or community could read negative intentions out of the rejection and thus bring disrepute to the board. Super majority is open to abuse. Agreed. While very different, let me explain a little about the ICANN Nominating Committee (which selects candidates, rather than just preparing the slate - though preparing the slate is the 6th phase in their process). The ICANN nomcom: reviews the positions they need to fill (board, SO and ALAC councils) they interview the respective organisation to understand the skills set and qualities they need (for example: the chairs of the finance committee and the audit committee are both leaving, we have a shortage of financial skills and need people with good financial skills, or our only African resident director is leaving and the SO and AC selection is unlikely to give us an African resident: please focus on that region) the nomcom embarks on outreach (including hiring a recruitment firm, advertising in some publications, engagement at meetings, word of mouth etc). They may give specific focus to a skill set or region based on the requests they receive. the nomcom receive and review the applications (largely done by the recruitment firm) to check the candidate is who s/he says s/he, works where they say they do etc. they shortlist and call for references they review the candidates, the references and the requests / requirements of the board / SO councils and prepare a slate. The requests are ONE of the considerations they use, but it is not preemptory and the nomcom is independent and has the discretion to select who THEY believe has the skills set and experience the organisation needs. they select from the slate. I would like to see the AfriNIC Nominating Committee go through a similar process. That may involve strengthening the Nominating Committee and I have no problem with a board member on the Nominating Committee, however I disagree completely with the notion of a board veto. > >> >> >>> >>>11- Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval. >> >> > Registered members only MUST never amend the bylaws. Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation. >> >> >The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation >> >> Am not sure we can legally override the companies act in this regard and would like to see legal opinion on this. In principle I agree that the board should never change the bylaws without a super majority special resolution of the community at either an SGM or AGMM, I am just not sure we can have the bylaws match the companies act in this regard. >> > > Companies act should never come in the way of community. We have 53 possible jurisdictions to consider if this becomes a major issue. By the way we can change our registered office without moving out of Mauritius. I see no need to be melodramatic. The question here is one of discipline and process. Either we need to change the membership process so all members become Registered Members, or we need an insertion as suggested indicating that in exercising their powers the Registered Members will only do so with the consent of the members. I see no legal obstacles to a 2 stage process, as long as the Registered Members do not have their discretion limited as fiduciaries and as long as the membership has the ability to remove the board if they go against the will of the members. So a vote of no confidence at an AGM or a SGM can topple the board (hence the need to be able to elect at a SGM). > >>> >>> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board. >> >> > > > In the above case board members would also be taking full responsibilty with legal repercussions should the board policy bring negative outcomes to the organization. Lets remember the boards oversight role is to ensure that the bottom up process is maintained. The ultimate decision for policy belongs to the community. Board in Afrinic is not like board in any other company. The Afrinic board role is purely oversight. We can and should not allow board to give themselves more powers. I think this is partly correct. The AfriNIC board performs two roles: fiduciary just like any other corporate board and Policy oversight (you will notice the uppercase ?P? in policy). The board is decisional in corporate matters and oversight in Policy matters. However Policy can have an impact on the corporation. There are a number of organisations in our sphere that operate in a similar manner. Some of them manage the roles by actually splitting them out (into a board and a policy committee). I don?t think we need to split the two (just yet), however we do need better definition of the issues and hopefully our governance committee can help document these issues. There are three ?buckets? into which board decisions can fit: board decisions (the corporation), community developed Policy (the Policy) which are ratified by the board and board or community decisions which have an impact on the other (the contention). To give some examples: board decision: moving offices as the current offices are too small. Management identifies new office space, the board reviews the financial and legal impact and approves community decision: Policy as we understand it cross-impact: Expected standards of behaviour. Fees. The Board may be responsible for ensuring the organisation has enough money to operate, but raising fees has an impact on the community. Or the community proposes a Policy which will dramatically reduce revenue or increase costs. I think the issue is that there is no process around raising or resolving disagreements. I think that should be the subject of another thread. However we saw disagreement when the board published expected standards of behaviour without discussion. However those are not Policy, they fall into that contention bucket without a clear ?owner?. I also think we need more community (note - not member, but community) engagement around these issues. Right now the budget does not go out for community discussion or input. I think that is a very good place to start getting engagement. If our revenues are too low, the community needs to understand where the company is spending its money and if revenue increase or cost containment is needed. If every place where costs can be cut meet community opposition (we cannot reduce the training budget, or the meetings budget) then revenues must go up. We also do not have a process of costing proposals (not just Policy proposals but all proposals). The reason commit and not just members is that the community participates in many of our activities - if we cut training, it is not just members who will be affected. Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From madomey at hotmail.com Mon Jul 4 21:17:03 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 21:17:03 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: , , Message-ID: Dear Seun, Thank you for your reaction to the email ?Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees?? and which further is raising the issue of the membership size. The suggestion was not made for us to adopt bluntly what is being done in other regions, rather go for an adequate contextualization. Membership growth is linked to the region the RIRs are serving and the fact that AfriNIC has such of least developed countries on the list maintained by United Nations (UN) should be of great concern to us and discussion should rather be focused around the points below: Is the current fees schedules adapted to the region and still efficient?What is the impact of such level of Least developed countries in the region on the membership growth?What can be done to mitigate the impact and grow the Internet in the region and the membership base of AFRINIC?How do we protect this region against people selling their IPv4 space and transferring them out if Inter-RIR transfer is allowed and reducing AFRINIC membership?What fees schedule for a such environment and with almost 90% of existing members <= small? Thank you, Marcus Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:29:05 +0300 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees Hello, The other thing we perhaps should note is that the membership size differs significantly[1]. AFRINIC does indeed give discount for certain categories of members which are not also existing in other RIRs. Overall, while we may observe the trends in other regions they may not necessarily be applicable in our environment. Regards 1. https://www.apnic.net/get-ip/apnic-membership/who-are-our-members Sent from my LG G4 Kindly excuse brevity and typos On 1 Jul 2016 20:49, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" wrote: Hi Serge, From the link of APNIC you provided, ( https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule ) checked the list of the least developed least countries maintained by United Nations (UN) ( http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm#least ) I have counted 34 African countries on the 54 we have which is about 63% This figure is speaking about itself if we have to consider what APNIC is doing. Thanks Marcus Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 11:53:13 +0100 From: sergekbk at gmail.com To: randy at psg.com; diana.ikwuagwu at unn.edu.ng CC: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees Hello Diana, Actually each RIR set the fees model which fit it's region and its community needs. So nothing wrong with your suggestion at all. For the case of our region, AFRINIC already gives 50% discount to NREN's and also waives fees for critical infrastructures like IXP's. In fact, other RIR like APNIC treat members in least developped countries differently. See link below. https://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/corporate-documents/documents/membership/member-fee-schedule BOD and Executive will have to see if this can fit our AFRINIC region needs and report to the community. Kind Regards. Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Randy Bush Date: 06/30/2016 05:00 (GMT+01:00) To: Diana Ikwuagwu Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > I think it will be very good if the membership maintenance price be > lowered. Please let the board look into this. i strongly agree. afrninc should pay us to take address space from them. this would make my business a bit easier. fwiw, i believe fees are set by the boards (or equivalents) of all the other rirs. the board, and execs, are responsible that income meets expenses. and with responsibility must go authority. has no one noticed the british insanity in which the country eats its children? i am hoping that the states does not follow. there is no need for the afrinic community to do so. randy _______________________________________________ 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 amelnaud at gmail.com Tue Jul 5 11:07:02 2016 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 11:07:02 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Community, find my contributions trough lines below. 2016-06-28 13:20 GMT+00:00 Omo Oaiya : > > > On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett wrote: > >> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several >> potential areas for improvement were identified. >> >> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the >> community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016. >> >> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these >> suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved. >> Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing >> list. In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the >> suggestions (and additional points that might be identified). >> >> Alan Barrett >> CEO, AFRINIC >> >> > > Thanks Alan. Comments below > > > >>>1 ...... but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether >> or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict >> must be resolved one way or another. >> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and >> modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision > > > Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. > The bylaws are consistent. Registered and Resource members vote. Associate > members observe. > > > I agree associate member can come from any structure or area, so he has to stay observer. > >>>2. Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and >> ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this >> document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is >> intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the >> Companies Act of Mauritius. > > > Supported > Yes the term "Bylows" seems more correct to me > > > >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and >> only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies >> Act as members of the company. > > > Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company > model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered. > > Indeed the laws of Mauritius are too restrictive with respect to the model that we consider most compatible with ours aspirations and desires for Afrinic > >> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members. >> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit >> should be. > > > Proposal : One term and at least an election before another nomination > I support this proposal. This will allow an elected member to have experience of the Board and that of the community in order to have a more objective view and to be more engaged for the community. > > >> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number >> of Directors who may work for the same organisation. >> >> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit >> should be. > > > We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and > skills so a better managed succession process is a must. I propose with > the exclusion of the CEO that we have > > - Max 1 per org/company > - Max 1 per country > - Max 2 per region > > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory > relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its > Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country. > > - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should > a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one > domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to > analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the > company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, > and/or any other relevant data shall be considered; > > - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. > I support Mr. Omo's proposal > > >> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that >> Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of >> their regional affiliation. > > > Supported > Support > > >>>7. Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors >> to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting >> on any matter where they have a conflict of interest. > > > Supported. In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy > and enforce it. > > >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more >> than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, >> Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person. > > > Supported > Support > > >> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, >> and 13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different >> reasons. Consider harmonising this. > > > Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement > through election at the next AGMM. > > >> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or >> disapprove nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section >> 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to >> disapprove any nomination > > > We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM. NOMCOM composition > and operation should be reviewed and improved. We can have the legal > advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the > appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and > unbiased. > > The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for > proper NOMCOM operation. > > I support Mr. Omo's proposal > > >>>11- Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the >> AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the >> Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the >> Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all >> AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered >> Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader >> approval. > > > Registered members only MUST never amend the bylaws. Amendment of Bylaws > beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and > consultation. > > The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not > more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and > in any meeting held during the consultation > > I support Mr. Omo's proposal > >> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section >> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal >> PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes >> introduced by the Board. > > > Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may > be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this. In case of > emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies. > > 11.5: Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article >> 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public >> policy meeting. > > > > Best wishes > Best Regards Arnaud. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amelnaud at gmail.com Tue Jul 5 11:27:04 2016 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 11:27:04 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2016-06-29 12:04 GMT+00:00 ALAIN AINA : > > Hello, > > Other points we may want to consider. See below: > > 1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for > at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule. > > "Fees review must be done in consultation with the members and community > must be notified at least six(6) months before new adopted fees schedule > takes effect." > > ++++++ current > 4.2 The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review > from time to time by the Board. > ++++++ > I support the proposal of Alain. One thing that should not be lost sight of, the Board was appointed by the community to represent where all memebres can not be. The board can not under any circumstances take a decision regarding the community without notice. The board could come to the community with a proposition and the community can accept or amend. > > > 2- Amend 13.4 to clarify that all directors are elected upon > recommendations by NOMCOM, while keep the competency requirements for the > non regional. > > +++++ current > 13.4 The Board shall comprise of nine (9) Directors appointed as follows: > > (i) Six Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called > under Article 11.1 of this Constitution to represent each of the regions > listed in Article 13.5; (Seats 1 to 6) > > (ii) Two Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called > under Article 11.1 upon the recommendation of the NomCom based on their > competencies and not their regional representation; and (Seats 7 and 8) > > (iii) The Chief Executive Officer. (Seat 9) > +++++ > I support this amendement too. > > 3- Amend 14 to add provisions for director recall by the membership : > > - Process starts by petition of minimum 10% of the total membership > - Challenged director given opportunity to address the community > - Recall approved by 75% of the votes > > ++++ current > 14 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS > > 14.1 A Director shall hold office until: > > (i) his term of office expires, without prejudice to Article 13; > > (ii) he/she signs a written notice of resignation and delivers it to the > address for service on the Company, which notice shall be effective when it > is received at that address or at such later time as may be specified in > the notice; > > (iii) he/she is removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all other > Directors; > > (iv) he/she otherwise ceases to be a Director pursuant to Section 139 of > the Act; or > > (v) the Director being the Chief Executive Officer, on the Board > terminating his employment as Chief Executive Officer. > +++++ > > I support this proposal, however, I propose the minimum to 20%, which is reasonable, Afrinic is not a single local association, it is a continental institution ... > > 4- Amend 12.10 (ii) to set the quorum at 10% of the total membership > either present physically or remotely > > > +++++++ current > 12.10 Quorum. > > (ii) The quorum for an Annual General Member meeting shall be composed of > minimum of ten (10) members in person comprising: > > a) Four (4) Directors elected to represent a region; > > b) One (1) Director elected on a non-regional criterion; and > > c) Five (5) Resource Members. > +++++++ > I support this proposal, however, I increase the minimum to 20%, which is reasonable, Afrinic is not a single local association, it is a continental institution ... > > 5- Amend 12.11 to set minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of > votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required. > > > I support this proposal, but, I proose 20%, which is reasonable, Afrinic is not a single local association, it is a continental institution ... > Cheers > > ?Alain > > Best Regards Arnaud. > > > > > > On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya wrote: > > > > On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett wrote: > >> Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several >> potential areas for improvement were identified. >> >> The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the >> community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016. >> >> I invite the community and the membership to comment on these >> suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved. >> Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing >> list. In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the >> suggestions (and additional points that might be identified). >> >> Alan Barrett >> CEO, AFRINIC >> >> > > Thanks Alan. Comments below > > > >>>1 ...... but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether >> or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict >> must be resolved one way or another. >> We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and >> modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision > > > Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. > The bylaws are consistent. Registered and Resource members vote. Associate > members observe. > > > >>>2. Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and >> ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this >> document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is >> intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the >> Companies Act of Mauritius. > > > Supported > > > >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and >> only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies >> Act as members of the company. > > > Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company > model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered. > > >> >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members. >> >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit >> should be. > > > Proposal : One term and at least an election before another nomination > > >> >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number >> of Directors who may work for the same organisation. >> >> >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit >> should be. > > > We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and > skills so a better managed succession process is a must. I propose with > the exclusion of the CEO that we have > > - Max 1 per org/company > - Max 1 per country > - Max 2 per region > > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory > relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its > Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country. > > - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should > a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one > domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to > analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the > company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, > and/or any other relevant data shall be considered; > > - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. > > >> >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that >> Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of >> their regional affiliation. > > > Supported > > >>>7. Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors >> to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting >> on any matter where they have a conflict of interest. > > > Supported. In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy > and enforce it. > > >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more >> than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, >> Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person. > > > Supported > > >> >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, >> and 13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different >> reasons. Consider harmonising this. > > > Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement > through election at the next AGMM. > > >> >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or >> disapprove nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section >> 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to >> disapprove any nomination > > > We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM. NOMCOM composition > and operation should be reviewed and improved. We can have the legal > advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the > appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and > unbiased. > > The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for > proper NOMCOM operation. > > > >>>11- Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the >> AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the >> Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the >> Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all >> AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered >> Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader >> approval. > > > Registered members only MUST never amend the bylaws. Amendment of Bylaws > beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and > consultation. > > The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not > more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and > in any meeting held during the consultation > > >> >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section >> 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal >> PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes >> introduced by the Board. > > > Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may > be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this. In case of > emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies. > > 11.5: Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article >> 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public >> policy meeting. > > > > Best wishes > > -- > Omo Oaiya > CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN > Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224 > Skype: kodion > http://www.wacren.net > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 noah at neo.co.tz Tue Jul 5 20:19:27 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:19:27 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: Re: AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Chair FYI Just incase you missed this. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Noah" Date: 30 Jun 2016 10:33 Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016 To: "General Discussions of AFRINIC" Cc: > > On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Noah wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga >> wrote: >> >> BoD Chair, can you please share with the community the new Strategic Plan? >> >> I couldn't find anything on the AFRINIC website. >> >> > > > Dear Chairman AFRINIC BoD, > > I am not sure if this email was received. So as a reminder, could anyone > from the Board please point some of us to the document or place we can read > about the *Strategic Plan for the organisation* that was announced at > Gaborone Meeting? > > > >> >>> Is there any activity plan for the current year? >>> >> >> I think for the above, AFRINIC is best positioned to share the 2016 >> Activity Plan which obviously should be based on this new SP. >> >> > > We we also have the *Activity Plan* for this year and how we expect to > see the organisation continue to grow based on the *New Strategic Plan?* > > > >> Noah >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From boubakarbarry at gmail.com Tue Jul 5 20:57:07 2016 From: boubakarbarry at gmail.com (Boubakar Barry) Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 20:57:07 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: Re: AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I do think indeed that members should know what the Board thinks where AfriNIC should heading to, so that we can eventually contribute. Boubakar On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Noah wrote: > Dear Chair > > FYI Just incase you missed this. > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: "Noah" > Date: 30 Jun 2016 10:33 > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016 > To: "General Discussions of AFRINIC" > Cc: > > >> >> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Noah wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga >>> wrote: >>> >>> BoD Chair, can you please share with the community the new Strategic >>> Plan? >>> >>> I couldn't find anything on the AFRINIC website. >>> >>> >> >> >> Dear Chairman AFRINIC BoD, >> >> I am not sure if this email was received. So as a reminder, could anyone >> from the Board please point some of us to the document or place we can read >> about the *Strategic Plan for the organisation* that was announced at >> Gaborone Meeting? >> >> >> >>> >>>> Is there any activity plan for the current year? >>>> >>> >>> I think for the above, AFRINIC is best positioned to share the 2016 >>> Activity Plan which obviously should be based on this new SP. >>> >>> >> >> We we also have the *Activity Plan* for this year and how we expect to >> see the organisation continue to grow based on the *New Strategic Plan?* >> >> >> >>> Noah >>> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 aalain at trstech.net Wed Jul 6 12:50:45 2016 From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 16:50:45 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <726438AD-9EBE-440C-8885-D7BAC246F62D@trstech.net> > On Jun 30, 2016, at 12:48 PM, Andrew Alston wrote: > > See comments inline (once again, speaking here as a resource member) > > 1- Amend 4.2 to add membership consultation and community notification for at least 6 months before applying adopted new fees schedule. > > "Fees review must be done in consultation with the members and community must be notified at least six(6) months before new adopted fees schedule takes effect." > > ++++++ current > 4.2 The fees mentioned in Article 4.1 above shall be subject to review from time to time by the Board. > ++++++ > > I have no problem with the 6 month notification Ack. > , I have a major problem with consultation outside of the member base and including the wider community in what is a commercial discussion between the company and the members. Community = ?members" + "potential members? Every year, AFRINIC get about 133 of the ?potential members? to become ?members?. So fees discussions is of interest for everyone. > I?m even very much on the fence about making the fees subject to a negotiation like this, because at the end of the day there is a fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable. If the directors have to raise fees to do that, and the community disagrees with the fee increases, this creates a legally untenable situation. > What if instead of ?community?, ?members? disagree in your case? Community knows the BoD fiduciary responsibility and care for the organisation, so that together, they should decide what is good for the organisation and fair for the community. But why a such community fear from a Director of a community-driven organisation ? > That being said, before I make up my mind which way I?d go on this, I?d need to see exact wording of what was proposed. > > 2- Amend 13.4 to clarify that all directors are elected upon recommendations by NOMCOM, while keep the competency requirements for the non regional. > > +++++ current > 13.4 The Board shall comprise of nine (9) Directors appointed as follows: > > (i) Six Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called under Article 11.1 of this Constitution to represent each of the regions listed in Article 13.5; (Seats 1 to 6) > > (ii) Two Directors elected by the Annual General Member Meeting called under Article 11.1 upon the recommendation of the NomCom based on their competencies and not their regional representation; and (Seats 7 and 8) > > (iii) The Chief Executive Officer. (Seat 9) > +++++ > > I understand the sentiment but I disagree with the wording of the proposed amendment. Directors are not elected based on a recommendation of NomCom, NomCom controls the slate to ensure that nominations meet criteria. They do not recommend the election of any particular party, and the use of the word recommend compromises the neutrality of the NomCom. > You may have missed the point here. The amendment is to align (i) on (ii). No further change. > > 3- Amend 14 to add provisions for director recall by the membership : > > - Process starts by petition of minimum 10% of the total membership > - Challenged director given opportunity to address the community > - Recall approved by 75% of the votes > > > ++++ current > 14 REMOVAL OF DIRECTORS > > 14.1 A Director shall hold office until: > > (i) his term of office expires, without prejudice to Article 13; > > (ii) he/she signs a written notice of resignation and delivers it to the address for service on the Company, which notice shall be effective when it is received at that address or at such later time as may be specified in the notice; > > (iii) he/she is removed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all other Directors; > > (iv) he/she otherwise ceases to be a Director pursuant to Section 139 of the Act; or > > (v) the Director being the Chief Executive Officer, on the Board terminating his employment as Chief Executive Officer. > +++++ > > Again, I have no objection to the proposal, though I would like to see an exact wording proposal. OK. > > 4- Amend 12.10 (ii) to set the quorum at 10% of the total membership either present physically or remotely > > > +++++++ current > 12.10 Quorum. > > (ii) The quorum for an Annual General Member meeting shall be composed of minimum of ten (10) members in person comprising: > > a) Four (4) Directors elected to represent a region; > > b) One (1) Director elected on a non-regional criterion; and > > c) Five (5) Resource Members. > +++++++ > > No real issue with this and it closes a fairly major loophole. I would however extend this to SGM?s as well as AGMM?s. OK. > > 5- Amend 12.11 to set minimum number of votes. For all vote, a minimum of votes from 10% of the total eligible voters required. > > On this I need more clarity. I would have a problem setting a vote quorum at 10% of the total membership It is said, 10% of the "eligible voters" and not "total membership?. We have seen significant difference between the two in the past. But let consider ?eligible voter? = ?total membership??... > base on every vote purely because if I examine voting trends both in our region and in other regions, this is an extremely high bar to meet. In Tunis I believe we came close, in Gaborone, to my knowledge we set the highest percentage of membership voting in RIR history, hitting in excess of 20%, but if you examine the RIPE region and other regions, you?re looking at voting percentages that are well sub 10%. There is no guarantee that we can sustain a 10% vote and I think the figure is far to high. While this is a reality, it must be changed and all RIRs going through this accountability assessment must acknowledge that less that 10% deciding on matters for a community-driven organisation is bad and effort must made to improve this by having more active members. Chase the dormant members, activate them or close them? Voting is possible by presence, by proxy and online?. Hope this helps ?Alain > I?d support a 5% quorum on votes. > > Cheers > > ?Alain > > > > > > > On Jun 28, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Omo Oaiya > wrote: > > > > On 10 June 2016 at 11:18, Alan Barrett > wrote: > Arising from a review of AFRINIC?s Bylaws and other documents, several potential areas for improvement were identified. > > The attached document was presented to the AFRINIC Membership and the community during the AGMM in Gaborone, Botswana, on 9 June 2016. > > I invite the community and the membership to comment on these suggestions, or any other areas where the Bylaws could be improved. Comments should be sent to the community-discuss at afrinic.net mailing list. In due course, Bylaws changes will be drafted to implement the suggestions (and additional points that might be identified). > > Alan Barrett > CEO, AFRINIC > > > > Thanks Alan. Comments below > > > >>>1 ...... but there is a conflict between 7.2(i) and 13.7(i) on whether or not Associate Members may vote in elections forDirectors. This conflict must be resolved one way or another. > We need to decide whether or not Associate Members should vote, and modify the Bylaws to give effect to that decision > > Just a matter of ambiguity in the statement in 7.2(i) to straighten out. The bylaws are consistent. Registered and Resource members vote. Associate members observe. > > > >>>2. Interchangeable use of the terms ?Bylaw? or ?Bylaws? and ?Constitution?:...... Suggest adding a clause 1.3 to clarify that this document may be referred to by the term ?Bylaws? or ?Constitution?, and is intended to serve the function of the Constitution in terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius. > > Supported > > > >>3- Clarification that all Registered Members in terms of Bylaws 6.3, and only such Registered Members, must be registered in terms of the Companies Act as members of the company. > > Supported but we shall seriously consider moving from this Private company model to a more community oriented model, where all members are considered. > > > >>4 - Term limits: Consider adding a term limit for elected Board members. > >> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be. > > Proposal : One term and at least an election before another nomination > > > >>> 5- Independence of Directors: Consider adding a limit to the number of Directors who may work for the same organisation. > > >>> We need to decide whether or not to add a limit, and what the limit should be. > > We need to keep refreshing the board with independence, expertise and skills so a better managed succession process is a must. I propose with the exclusion of the CEO that we have > > - Max 1 per org/company > - Max 1 per country > - Max 2 per region > > - Not more than one Director may have employment, consultancy or advisory relationships with the same Company or Organization and/or with one of its Related Companies or Organizations established or not in the same country. > > - not more than one Director may be domiciled in the same country. Should a candidate for a position on the Board of Directors have more than one domicile, one of which involves a presumed incompatibility, in order to analyze his/her case for usual country of residence, the country where the company or organization he/she is a part of or works for is established, and/or any other relevant data shall be considered; > > - not more than two Directors may be domiciled in the same region. > > > >>>6- Regional representation: Consider modifying 13.5 to state that Directors must act in the interests of AFRINIC as a whole,regardless of their regional affiliation. > > Supported > > >>>7. Conflict of interest: Consider adding a requirement for Directors to disclose any conflict of interest, and to recuse themselves from voting on any matter where they have a conflict of interest. > > Supported. In addition, the Board must have a Conflict of Interest Policy and enforce it. > > >>> 8- Separation of powers: Consider adding a requirement that no more than one key position (Board Chair, Vice Chair, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer) may be occupied by the same person. > > Supported > > > >>> 9- Replacement of Directors: The bylaws sections 13.1, 13.8, 13.10, and 13.14 give different methods of replacing Directors for different reasons. Consider harmonising this. > > Harmonisation supported but the preferred option should be replacement through election at the next AGMM. > > > >>> 10- Board approval of nominations: The Board can approve or disapprove nominations for Board elections in terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). Consider requiring a supermajority of two thirds of the Board to disapprove any nomination > > We should remove this approval and strengthen NOMCOM. NOMCOM composition and operation should be reviewed and improved. We can have the legal advisor and past NOMCOM chair as non-voting members and make the appointment of the other members by the board more transparent, fair and unbiased. > > The election timeline also needs to be revisited to allow enough time for proper NOMCOM operation. > > > >>>11- Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi),so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval. > > Registered members only MUST never amend the bylaws. Amendment of Bylaws beyond regulatory compliance must require general membership notice and consultation. > > The proposed amendment should be published not less than 60 days and not more than 90 days before with provisions for members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation > > > >>>12- Policies introduced by the Board: In terms of the Bylaws section 11.4, the Board may adopt policy changes that did not go through the normal PDP. Consider giving the community the right to reject such policy changes introduced by the Board. > > Section 11.5 seems to give this right to the community but endorsement may be open to misinterpretation so we shall just remove this. In case of emergency, section 8 of PDP on varying the policy process applies. > > 11.5: Any policy adopted by the Board under the provisions of Article 11.4 shall be submitted to the community for endorsement at the next public policy meeting. > > > Best wishes > > -- > Omo Oaiya > CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN > Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224 > Skype: kodion > http://www.wacren.net > > _______________________________________________ > 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 silber.mike at gmail.com Wed Jul 6 13:02:16 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 15:02:16 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <726438AD-9EBE-440C-8885-D7BAC246F62D@trstech.net> References: <726438AD-9EBE-440C-8885-D7BAC246F62D@trstech.net> Message-ID: <23EDCB73-99A6-4585-9D2C-39F9D518E5C3@gmail.com> Alain > On 6 Jul 2016, at 14:50, ALAIN AINA wrote: > > >> , I have a major problem with consultation outside of the member base and including the wider community in what is a commercial discussion between the company and the members. > > Community = ?members" + "potential members? > > Every year, AFRINIC get about 133 of the ?potential members? to become ?members?. So fees discussions is of interest for everyone. > I tend to agree with you. However I think that we must acknowledge that we cannot limit community to ?potential members? only. I also think that the views of end users (corporate and individual) should be considered. However the Board is accountable to the organisation and its members, so community views can and should be considered but cannot prevail if they are not aligned with member views. Hopefully the community (which includes members) can sway members to their view. > >> I?m even very much on the fence about making the fees subject to a negotiation like this, because at the end of the day there is a fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable. If the directors have to raise fees to do that, and the community disagrees with the fee increases, this creates a legally untenable situation. >> > > What if instead of ?community?, ?members? disagree in your case? Community knows the BoD fiduciary responsibility and care for the organisation, so that together, they should decide what is good for the organisation and fair for the community. I think Andrew is incorrect in characterising this as a ?negotiation?. It is a process of influencing the organisation. If we change the context - I think Andrew?s objection falls away. > > But why a such community fear from a Director of a community-driven organisation ? > But why the ad hominem comment? >> > > > While this is a reality, it must be changed and all RIRs going through this accountability assessment must acknowledge that less that 10% deciding on matters for a community-driven organisation is bad and effort must made to improve this by having more active members. Chase the dormant members, activate them or close them? > > Voting is possible by presence, by proxy and online?. > No problem encouraging participation - however, given the rights associated with membership, termination will amount to an expropriation and is not acceptable unless for breach of terms. Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Wed Jul 6 16:22:38 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 19:22:38 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 30 Jun 2016 11:51, "Andrew Alston" wrote: > > See comments inline (once again, speaking here as a resource member) > Comments in line and speaking as a community member/netizen/internet end user, who cares for the organization vested with the mandate of managing the most critical number resources upon which the INTERNET as we know it depends on. > > I have a major problem with consultation outside of the member base and including the wider community in what is a commercial discussion between the company and the members. > > All the current resource members were community members before and some have ceased from being resource members after closer of their business and may comeback for resources in the near future. So this is not just for those once community who have since signed the AFRINIC RSA and hence use resources but it's for all "netizens" who reside within the AFRINIC region including those who are soon to be "resource members". > > > >> I?m even very much on the fence about making the fees subject to a negotiation like this, because at the end of the day there is a fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable. If the directors have to raise fees to do that, and the community disagrees with the fee increases, this creates a legally untenable situation. >> >> This begs the question! Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? Whose interests do they serve? What where they before they became directors? Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] Noah [1]The fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable can not be realised without consulting or involving stakeholders (community) especially in matters that involve fees/monies after its our collective responsibility to ensure AFRINIC is sustainable. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Thu Jul 7 05:15:08 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 08:15:08 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: Re: AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1D54264D-0A1F-4EF3-BC75-E72DD03C34E1@nftconsult.com> Its unusual that chair could consistently ignore responding to this. Can someone maybe CEO help ensure that chair gets this request. Hoping to read a reply soon. Regards On 7/5/16, 11:57 PM, "Boubakar Barry" wrote: I do think indeed that members should know what the Board thinks where AfriNIC should heading to, so that we can eventually contribute. Boubakar On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Noah wrote: Dear Chair FYI Just incase you missed this. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Noah" Date: 30 Jun 2016 10:33 Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Strategic Plan - Post 2016 To: "General Discussions of AFRINIC" Cc: On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 2:25 PM, Noah wrote: On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:05 PM, serge ilunga wrote: BoD Chair, can you please share with the community the new Strategic Plan? I couldn't find anything on the AFRINIC website. Dear Chairman AFRINIC BoD, I am not sure if this email was received. So as a reminder, could anyone from the Board please point some of us to the document or place we can read about the Strategic Plan for the organisation that was announced at Gaborone Meeting? Is there any activity plan for the current year? I think for the above, AFRINIC is best positioned to share the 2016 Activity Plan which obviously should be based on this new SP. We we also have the Activity Plan for this year and how we expect to see the organisation continue to grow based on the New Strategic Plan? Noah _______________________________________________ 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 badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Thu Jul 7 07:07:45 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 07:07:45 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Thank you Noah Speaking as a community and resource member. We need some of our elected members to be cautious on how they translate the role and responsibilities of the board. The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top down issue. This is more reason for me to ask that we explore registering the organisation in a jurisdiction that will not work against the bottom up process or bring up room for governance confusion. We should start dialogue with the current host to enable Afrinic get special dispensation in its registration. Let's continue to explore additive options Badru Ntege CEO NFT Consult Ltd Www.Nftconsult.com ?Vision without execution is hallucination.? ? Thomas A. Edison On 6 Jul 2016, at 7:23 pm, Noah > wrote: On 30 Jun 2016 11:51, "Andrew Alston" > wrote: > > See comments inline (once again, speaking here as a resource member) > Comments in line and speaking as a community member/netizen/internet end user, who cares for the organization vested with the mandate of managing the most critical number resources upon which the INTERNET as we know it depends on. > > I have a major problem with consultation outside of the member base and including the wider community in what is a commercial discussion between the company and the members. > > All the current resource members were community members before and some have ceased from being resource members after closer of their business and may comeback for resources in the near future. So this is not just for those once community who have since signed the AFRINIC RSA and hence use resources but it's for all "netizens" who reside within the AFRINIC region including those who are soon to be "resource members". > > > >> I?m even very much on the fence about making the fees subject to a negotiation like this, because at the end of the day there is a fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable. If the directors have to raise fees to do that, and the community disagrees with the fee increases, this creates a legally untenable situation. >> >> This begs the question! Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? Whose interests do they serve? What where they before they became directors? Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] Noah [1]The fiduciary duty on the directors to ensure that the company is sustainable can not be realised without consulting or involving stakeholders (community) especially in matters that involve fees/monies after its our collective responsibility to ensure AFRINIC is sustainable. _______________________________________________ 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 aalain at trstech.net Thu Jul 7 21:27:22 2016 From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:27:22 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> Message-ID: <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Hello SM I beg. Lets stop this discussion about to whom AFRINIC belong to, playing with ?members" and "non members", invoking RSA and AFRINIC Ltd, etc?. We have come a long way to this community driven organisation which role is to serve the AFRICAN Internet community by distributing numbers ressources and beyond. Like other RIRs, the AfriNIC organisational structure has been set to encourage a bottom-up self governance management model in which community in general, members, the Board of Directors elected by these members have a role and a say. I would invite all of us to read : - The 1997 AFRINIC proposal https://www.isoc.org/inet97/ans97/afrinic.htm - The IANA report on AFRNIC accreditation https://www.iana.org/reports/2005/afrinic-report-08apr2005.html - AFRINIC vision, mission, cores values and success factors http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/origins I would also suggest that we plan a session on AFRINIC History during AFRINC-25 like we had AF* history at AIS2016 Hope this helps ?Alain > On Jul 7, 2016, at 3:55 PM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: > > Hi Noah, Badru, > At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: >> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? > > The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. > >> Whose interests do they serve? > > One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the member driven Policy Development Process". > >> What where they before they became directors? > > The directors were members of the company. > >> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] > > The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the accountability angle. > > At 00:07 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote: >> The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top down issue. > > If the company belongs to this group there would be a document about that. The only "agreement" up to now is the one where the company agrees that its members will follow the policies adopted by this group. There is a discussion about that in the mailing list archives. > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > > _______________________________________________ > RPD mailing list > RPD at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd From akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng Thu Jul 7 21:35:36 2016 From: akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng (Timothy Ola Akinfenwa) Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 22:35:36 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Message-ID: +1 Alain. God bless you sir! Timothy On 7 Jul 2016 10:29 p.m., "ALAIN AINA" wrote: > Hello SM > > I beg. Lets stop this discussion about to whom AFRINIC belong to, playing > with ?members" and "non members", invoking RSA and AFRINIC Ltd, etc?. > We have come a long way to this community driven organisation which role > is to serve the AFRICAN Internet community by distributing numbers > ressources and beyond. Like other RIRs, the AfriNIC organisational > structure has been set to encourage a bottom-up self governance management > model in which community in general, members, the Board of Directors > elected by these members have a role and a say. > > I would invite all of us to read : > > - The 1997 AFRINIC proposal > https://www.isoc.org/inet97/ans97/afrinic.htm > > - The IANA report on AFRNIC accreditation > https://www.iana.org/reports/2005/afrinic-report-08apr2005.html > > - AFRINIC vision, mission, cores values and success factors > http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/origins > > I would also suggest that we plan a session on AFRINIC History during > AFRINC-25 like we had AF* history at AIS2016 > > Hope this helps > > ?Alain > > > > > > > > On Jul 7, 2016, at 3:55 PM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: > > > > Hi Noah, Badru, > > At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: > >> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? > > > > The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. > > > >> Whose interests do they serve? > > > > One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the > guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the > member driven Policy Development Process". > > > >> What where they before they became directors? > > > > The directors were members of the company. > > > >> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same > community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] > > > > The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of > the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies > adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for > example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. > Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay > those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is > dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the > accountability angle. > > > > At 00:07 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote: > >> The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of > current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top > down issue. > > > > If the company belongs to this group there would be a document about > that. The only "agreement" up to now is the one where the company agrees > that its members will follow the policies adopted by this group. There is > a discussion about that in the mailing list archives. > > > > Regards, > > S. Moonesamy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RPD mailing list > > RPD at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jul 8 01:51:07 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 01:51:07 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net>, <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Message-ID: +1. Thanks Alain Less we forget our history. > On 8 Jul 2016, at 12:28 am, ALAIN AINA wrote: > > Hello SM > > I beg. Lets stop this discussion about to whom AFRINIC belong to, playing with ?members" and "non members", invoking RSA and AFRINIC Ltd, etc?. > We have come a long way to this community driven organisation which role is to serve the AFRICAN Internet community by distributing numbers ressources and beyond. Like other RIRs, the AfriNIC organisational structure has been set to encourage a bottom-up self governance management model in which community in general, members, the Board of Directors elected by these members have a role and a say. > > I would invite all of us to read : > > - The 1997 AFRINIC proposal > https://www.isoc.org/inet97/ans97/afrinic.htm > > - The IANA report on AFRNIC accreditation > https://www.iana.org/reports/2005/afrinic-report-08apr2005.html > > - AFRINIC vision, mission, cores values and success factors > http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/origins > > I would also suggest that we plan a session on AFRINIC History during AFRINC-25 like we had AF* history at AIS2016 > > Hope this helps > > ?Alain > > > > > > >> On Jul 7, 2016, at 3:55 PM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: >> >> Hi Noah, Badru, >> At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: >>> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? >> >> The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. >> >>> Whose interests do they serve? >> >> One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the member driven Policy Development Process". >> >>> What where they before they became directors? >> >> The directors were members of the company. >> >>> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] >> >> The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the accountability angle. >> >> At 00:07 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote: >>> The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top down issue. >> >> If the company belongs to this group there would be a document about that. The only "agreement" up to now is the one where the company agrees that its members will follow the policies adopted by this group. There is a discussion about that in the mailing list archives. >> >> Regards, >> S. Moonesamy >> >> _______________________________________________ >> RPD mailing list >> RPD at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From christianbope at gmail.com Fri Jul 8 05:01:35 2016 From: christianbope at gmail.com (Bope Domilongo Christian) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:01:35 +0800 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Message-ID: [speaking on my personal capacity] @Alain thank you for sharing those link which is very helpful to remind ourselves the history, the main goal of RIR and the importance of button up process. Hope community at large and members will have time to go through. Regards On 8 Jul 2016 1:29 a.m., "ALAIN AINA" wrote: > Hello SM > > I beg. Lets stop this discussion about to whom AFRINIC belong to, playing > with ?members" and "non members", invoking RSA and AFRINIC Ltd, etc?. > We have come a long way to this community driven organisation which role > is to serve the AFRICAN Internet community by distributing numbers > ressources and beyond. Like other RIRs, the AfriNIC organisational > structure has been set to encourage a bottom-up self governance management > model in which community in general, members, the Board of Directors > elected by these members have a role and a say. > > I would invite all of us to read : > > - The 1997 AFRINIC proposal > https://www.isoc.org/inet97/ans97/afrinic.htm > > - The IANA report on AFRNIC accreditation > https://www.iana.org/reports/2005/afrinic-report-08apr2005.html > > - AFRINIC vision, mission, cores values and success factors > http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/origins > > I would also suggest that we plan a session on AFRINIC History during > AFRINC-25 like we had AF* history at AIS2016 > > Hope this helps > > ?Alain > > > > > > > > On Jul 7, 2016, at 3:55 PM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: > > > > Hi Noah, Badru, > > At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: > >> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? > > > > The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. > > > >> Whose interests do they serve? > > > > One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the > guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the > member driven Policy Development Process". > > > >> What where they before they became directors? > > > > The directors were members of the company. > > > >> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same > community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] > > > > The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of > the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies > adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for > example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. > Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay > those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is > dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the > accountability angle. > > > > At 00:07 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote: > >> The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of > current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top > down issue. > > > > If the company belongs to this group there would be a document about > that. The only "agreement" up to now is the one where the company agrees > that its members will follow the policies adopted by this group. There is > a discussion about that in the mailing list archives. > > > > Regards, > > S. Moonesamy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RPD mailing list > > RPD at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd > > > _______________________________________________ > RPD mailing list > RPD at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From neriah.sossou at gmail.com Fri Jul 8 07:18:47 2016 From: neriah.sossou at gmail.com (Neriah Sossou) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 07:18:47 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Message-ID: +1 Alain. We truly seem to have forgotten our roots and the battles that were fought by our elders up until this point. Let us continue building on what we inherited instead of constantly destroying and rebuilding. Neriah > On 7 Jul 2016, at 21:27, ALAIN AINA wrote: > > Hello SM > > I beg. Lets stop this discussion about to whom AFRINIC belong to, playing with ?members" and "non members", invoking RSA and AFRINIC Ltd, etc?. > We have come a long way to this community driven organisation which role is to serve the AFRICAN Internet community by distributing numbers ressources and beyond. Like other RIRs, the AfriNIC organisational structure has been set to encourage a bottom-up self governance management model in which community in general, members, the Board of Directors elected by these members have a role and a say. > > I would invite all of us to read : > > - The 1997 AFRINIC proposal > https://www.isoc.org/inet97/ans97/afrinic.htm > > - The IANA report on AFRNIC accreditation > https://www.iana.org/reports/2005/afrinic-report-08apr2005.html > > - AFRINIC vision, mission, cores values and success factors > http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/origins > > I would also suggest that we plan a session on AFRINIC History during AFRINC-25 like we had AF* history at AIS2016 > > Hope this helps > > ?Alain > > > > > > >> On Jul 7, 2016, at 3:55 PM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: >> >> Hi Noah, Badru, >> At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: >>> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? >> >> The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. >> >>> Whose interests do they serve? >> >> One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the member driven Policy Development Process". >> >>> What where they before they became directors? >> >> The directors were members of the company. >> >>> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] >> >> The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the accountability angle. >> >> At 00:07 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote: >>> The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top down issue. >> >> If the company belongs to this group there would be a document about that. The only "agreement" up to now is the one where the company agrees that its members will follow the policies adopted by this group. There is a discussion about that in the mailing list archives. >> >> Regards, >> S. Moonesamy >> >> _______________________________________________ >> RPD mailing list >> RPD at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net Fri Jul 8 07:50:33 2016 From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 08:50:33 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Message-ID: +1 I am inclined to join the chorus here instead of nodding silently. The history refresher is good but it should not have been necessary. The discussion on powers that minimises the role of the community in favour of the board and members is a symptom of dysfunction and should be addressed. If the current corporate structure imposes legal obstacles to the satisfaction of community needs, we should change it. No better time than now ?.along with the bylaws. > On 8 Jul 2016, at 08:18, Neriah Sossou wrote: > > +1 Alain. > We truly seem to have forgotten our roots and the battles that were fought by our elders up until this point. > Let us continue building on what we inherited instead of constantly destroying and rebuilding. > Neriah > >> On 7 Jul 2016, at 21:27, ALAIN AINA wrote: >> >> Hello SM >> >> I beg. Lets stop this discussion about to whom AFRINIC belong to, playing with ?members" and "non members", invoking RSA and AFRINIC Ltd, etc?. >> We have come a long way to this community driven organisation which role is to serve the AFRICAN Internet community by distributing numbers ressources and beyond. Like other RIRs, the AfriNIC organisational structure has been set to encourage a bottom-up self governance management model in which community in general, members, the Board of Directors elected by these members have a role and a say. >> >> I would invite all of us to read : >> >> - The 1997 AFRINIC proposal >> https://www.isoc.org/inet97/ans97/afrinic.htm >> >> - The IANA report on AFRNIC accreditation >> https://www.iana.org/reports/2005/afrinic-report-08apr2005.html >> >> - AFRINIC vision, mission, cores values and success factors >> http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/origins >> >> I would also suggest that we plan a session on AFRINIC History during AFRINC-25 like we had AF* history at AIS2016 >> >> Hope this helps >> >> ?Alain >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jul 7, 2016, at 3:55 PM, sm+afrinic at elandsys.com wrote: >>> >>> Hi Noah, Badru, >>> At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: >>>> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? >>> >>> The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. >>> >>>> Whose interests do they serve? >>> >>> One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the member driven Policy Development Process". >>> >>>> What where they before they became directors? >>> >>> The directors were members of the company. >>> >>>> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] >>> >>> The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the accountability angle. >>> >>> At 00:07 07-07-2016, Badru Ntege wrote: >>>> The company belongs to the community at large under the custody of current members who then elect a board. It should never be seen as a top down issue. >>> >>> If the company belongs to this group there would be a document about that. The only "agreement" up to now is the one where the company agrees that its members will follow the policies adopted by this group. There is a discussion about that in the mailing list archives. >>> >>> Regards, >>> S. Moonesamy >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> RPD mailing list >>> RPD at afrinic.net >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > _______________________________________________ > RPD mailing list > RPD at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd ? Omo Oaiya CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN Mobile: +234 806 4522778, +221 784 305 224 Skype: kodion http://www.wacren.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Fri Jul 8 07:58:24 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:58:24 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> Message-ID: On 7 Jul 2016 15:24, wrote: > > Hi Noah, Badru, > HI SM, > At 09:22 06-07-2016, Noah wrote: >> >> Who elects the directors, do they elect themselves? > > The directors of Afrinic Ltd are elected by the members of Afrinic Ltd. > >> Whose interests do they serve? > > One of the powers of the directors of the company is to "determine the guidelines for the allocation of address space to members in line with the member driven Policy Development Process". > >> What where they before they became directors? > > The directors were members of the company. > I was not naive when I asked all the above questions. I knew what I was asking and why I was asking. >> Are they now so special now all over sudden and cant consult the same community "resource members + non" who elected them? [1] > > The "non" (in the above) does not elect the directors. Section 6(d) of the RSA states that the members of Afrinic Ltd will follow the policies adopted by this group and follow global policies. Membership fees, for example, are not set through policies which are adopted by this group. Membership fees is usually a matter discussed between the members who pay those fees. A member usually does not vote for a director if the member is dissatisfied with the decisions taken by the director. That is the accountability angle. > FYI, besides being an netizen and a community member, I AM A RESOURCE MEMBER. I therefore have all the rights to query anything and raise my concerns where I see fit. I just prefer to conduct myself as a community member. What I was trying to point out is that, whether a resource member or non-resource member, some decision regarding AFRINIC business ought to be openly discussed following the bottom up approach. [1] Therefore since some members are so bent on the argument that only resource members should be concerned.... I beg to ask! Were the so called resource members/voters/the paying one's consulted regarding this new fees being proposed? Noah [1] Even IANA Transition has been community centric follow the bottom up process. Why is it becoming an issue today when it come to AFRINIC. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com Fri Jul 8 08:03:16 2016 From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 08:03:16 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Question Message-ID: Hi All, Speaking as a resource member. I am seeing very many vague references to changing the legal structure of AfriNIC. Let us get a little less vague here ? exactly what structure are the people who are talking about this proposing? What are they looking for? Let?s get a lot more specific and then explore the actual implications of what the community is thinking. Andrew -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kmw.elitcha at gmail.com Fri Jul 8 10:05:43 2016 From: kmw.elitcha at gmail.com (abel ELITCHA) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:05:43 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160707041153.0cda5b58@resistor.net> <0306E02A-A8B6-475D-BD30-C81E19A3EA2C@trstech.net> Message-ID: Hi Comments below 2016-07-08 7:50 GMT+00:00 Omo Oaiya : > +1 I am inclined to join the chorus here instead of nodding silently. > The history refresher is good but it should not have been necessary. > Yup! > > The discussion on powers that minimises the role of the community in > favour of the board and members is a symptom of dysfunction and should be > addressed. > Sad that I have personally to join the boat with these malfunctions. If the current corporate structure imposes legal obstacles to the > satisfaction of community needs, we should change it. No better time than > now ?.along with the bylaws. > I tend to support this suggestion and why is the board ignoring community request? Is that normal business at AfriNIC? -- Best regards, --Komi A. Elitcha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Fri Jul 8 12:07:49 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 16:07:49 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Strategy Document References: <4303AC99-CF81-4D0A-BDCE-B6979D469408@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <0D788289-3BE3-4430-BA4B-B775B22740CA@afrinic.net> FYI. The appended message was sent to the members-discuss list. > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Alan Barrett > Subject: Strategy Document > Date: 8 July 2016 at 16:06:10 +0400 > To: AfriNIC Discuss > > Dear Members, > > The AFRINIC Board has prepared the attached Strategy Document and approved it for publication. This document is a summary of strategic objectives and projects planned for the five years from 2016 to 2020. > > Alan Barrett > CEO, AFRINIC > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Strategy-Document-2016 2020-20160708b.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 122998 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- > > From sfolayan at gmail.com Fri Jul 8 12:11:44 2016 From: sfolayan at gmail.com (Sunday Folayan) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:11:44 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: AFRINIC - Matters Arising Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:10:27 +0100 From: Sunday Folayan To: members-discuss at afrinic.net Dear Members and the Community at large, Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related matters. Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the Board?s understanding of the status quo. It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies have. The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in discussions on any relevant matter. AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or from the community before making decisions, but there is no general requirement that they do so. Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members elect the Board. The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is the membership base. Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day operational handling. The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond only after they have received due consideration. Best Regards ... Sunday Folayan Chair, AFRINIC Board -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sergekbk at gmail.com Fri Jul 8 20:59:45 2016 From: sergekbk at gmail.com (sergekbk) Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2016 21:59:45 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment Message-ID: <3lyafoq9wa70beqbtpwa4tds.1468011355391@email.android.com> Thanks Alain to community attention such important facts.Vision, mission and core values shall drive each one of us action.History to show how the organization has evolve towards the materialization of the vision and learn from past.We can't just sweep the past and ignore what has been done before. With Regards. Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: abel ELITCHA Date: 07/08/2016 11:05 (GMT+01:00) To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Accountability assessment HiComments below 2016-07-08 7:50 GMT+00:00 Omo Oaiya : +1 ?I am inclined to join the chorus here instead of nodding silently. ? ?The history refresher is good but it should not have been necessary. ? Yup!? The discussion on powers that minimises the role of the community in favour of the board and members is a symptom of dysfunction and should be addressed.?Sad that I have personally to join the boat with these malfunctions. ? If the current corporate structure imposes legal obstacles to the satisfaction of community needs, we should change it.? No better time than now ?.along with the bylaws. I tend to support this suggestion and why is the board ignoring ?community request? Is that normal business at AfriNIC?? -- Best regards, --Komi A. Elitcha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Fri Jul 8 14:21:20 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 17:21:20 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> Message-ID: <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Chair Thanks for the input. What has seemed to bring this discussion up in my opinion is the use of Mauritian law in some instances in the past by individuals to either circumvent or challenge the bylaws. There is a need to open dialogue on how the two are aligned to prevent us constantly coming to this issue. What we also need to separate that changing the jurisdiction if that ends up to be the only way should never be linked to moving the HQ. I think and feel Mauritius has been a good home for AfriNIC and should continue to be the home. What we need to then do is look at what would be the ideal registration process for a community ?bottom up? entity, and then engage our hosts to see if they are ready to give us that legal dispensation. Failing that we can then ask out of our 53 potential regional states which one is prepared to give us that dispensation so we can register in that state. AfriNIC can then be registered in that country as a legal entity but still maintain its HQ in Mauritius. My suggestion as had been suggested a few years back a body of community members plus some board members be set up in an adhoc committee to explore this and make recommendations to the community at the next AGMM. We need to stop pushing this under the carpet and adress it once and for all. Regards BN On 7/8/16, 3:11 PM, "Sunday Folayan" wrote: -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: AFRINIC - Matters Arising Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:10:27 +0100 From: Sunday Folayan To: members-discuss at afrinic.net Dear Members and the Community at large, Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related matters. Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the Board?s understanding of the status quo. It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies have. The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in discussions on any relevant matter. AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or from the community before making decisions, but there is no general requirement that they do so. Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members elect the Board. The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is the membership base. Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day operational handling. The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond only after they have received due consideration. Best Regards ... Sunday Folayan Chair, AFRINIC Board _______________________________________________ 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 alan.barrett at afrinic.net Mon Jul 11 07:59:32 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:59:32 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: <9A981FE9-6B47-40C3-BF47-0747A7748270@afrinic.net> > On 8 Jul 2016, at 18:21, Badru Ntege wrote: > > Chair > > Thanks for the input. > > What has seemed to bring this discussion up in my opinion is the use of Mauritian law in some instances in the past by individuals to either circumvent or challenge the bylaws. > > There is a need to open dialogue on how the two are aligned to prevent us constantly coming to this issue. I am not the Chair, but please could you give details of the instances in the past that you are referring to. We need to understand the problem, if any, before considering how to deal with it. > What we also need to separate that changing the jurisdiction if that ends up to be the only way should never be linked to moving the HQ. I think and feel Mauritius has been a good home for AfriNIC and should continue to be the home. > > What we need to then do is look at what would be the ideal registration process for a community ?bottom up? entity, and then engage our hosts to see if they are ready to give us that legal dispensation. > > Failing that we can then ask out of our 53 potential regional states which one is prepared to give us that dispensation so we can register in that state. AfriNIC can then be registered in that country as a legal entity but still maintain its HQ in Mauritius. > > My suggestion as had been suggested a few years back a body of community members plus some board members be set up in an adhoc committee to explore this and make recommendations to the community at the next AGMM. > > We need to stop pushing this under the carpet and adress it once and for all. I still don?t know what problem you want to address, or what you think has been pushed under the carpet, but I can point out that the new Governance Committee will have within its terms of reference the power to make recommendations about "The legal framework of AFRINIC, including the place and manner of company registration;? Alan Barrett From silber.mike at gmail.com Mon Jul 11 08:23:59 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:23:59 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: Hi Badru I agree with you that these issues should not be swept under the carpet, but I disagree on some of the alternatives you are suggesting. More in-line below. Regards Mike > On 8 Jul 2016, at 16:21, Badru Ntege wrote: > .. > What has seemed to bring this discussion up in my opinion is the use of Mauritian law in some instances in the past by individuals to either circumvent or challenge the bylaws. > Why is this necessary? Why do you persist with this sort of attach on ?individuals?. It really does you and your position as a leader in the community no credit and comes across as petty. > There is a need to open dialogue on how the two are aligned to prevent us constantly coming to this issue. You have the issue exactly right - ALIGNMENT, not replacement! > > What we also need to separate that changing the jurisdiction if that ends up to be the only way should never be linked to moving the HQ. I think and feel Mauritius has been a good home for AfriNIC and should continue to be the home. > > What we need to then do is look at what would be the ideal registration process for a community ?bottom up? entity, and then engage our hosts to see if they are ready to give us that legal dispensation. > Respectfully - I think that is precisely the incorrect approach. From my detailed knowledge of two jurisdictions and a passing knowledge of several others, we will have similar (or different) issues in almost every jurisdiction. We have AfriNIC the corporation and AfriNIC the community and the problem is the connection between the two - it is NOT the jurisdiction or the relevant company law. If we can get that interface correct - that should resolve most of the issues that have been identified. Personally I think there are some good lessons on what can be done (as well as what should not be done) in the IANA transition process. Seun and Fiona (as the most active from this community AFAIK) may want to comment here as well - but there are ways to ensure that the corporation ?belongs? to the community, while the staff can get on with running the corporation and the board can provide direction and oversight in accordance with their fiduciary obligations. The budget is a perfect example: the staff prepare the budget and execute against the approved budget, the board approves the budget ?. but where is the community. The community right now feels excluded. IMO the answer is not to hand the preparation or approval of the budget to the community! IMO the answer is to restructure the process to ensure the community is included in the preparation, the input of the community is sought before approval and the community is aware of performance against budget. First - that requires multi-year budgets, otherwise that process is too cumbersome. Second - that process can be built on top of almost any company law or jurisdictional requirements. In essence it is running DUAL STACK governance! It requires a bit of creativity and some problem solving skills, but it is a lot more effective that the binary options you are suggesting. > Failing that we can then ask out of our 53 potential regional states which one is prepared to give us that dispensation so we can register in that state. Most countries allow company registrations in their jurisdiction. I am not sure what dispensation you are suggesting? I hope you are not suggesting we try create our own form of corporation? That is so capable of capture and the time and effort involved in making it up would be immense. I don?t think a ?make it up as we go along? approach or special dispensations subject to the whim of the leadership at the time is really what we are after. > AfriNIC can then be registered in that country as a legal entity but still maintain its HQ in Mauritius. That is likely to have significant tax consequences. > > My suggestion as had been suggested a few years back a body of community members plus some board members be set up in an adhoc committee to explore this and make recommendations to the community at the next AGMM. > I would propose that we rather use the (to be formed) governance committee to see how we can dual stack community governance and corporate governance. Personally I am VERY frustrated that we have been talking about a governance committee since Djibouti and have seen some useful documents - but no action. This is precisely the point for which the committee was mooted by Fiona - so why not use it instead of creating more ad hoc structures? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Mon Jul 11 08:30:41 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:30:41 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: > On 11 Jul 2016, at 12:23, Mike Silber wrote: > Personally I am VERY frustrated that we have been talking about a governance committee since Djibouti and have seen some useful documents - but no action. I disagree that there has been no action. The Governnce Committee charter was drafted, received comments from the community, was edited to take comments into account, was approved by the community, and was approved by the Board. The next step is to elect/appoint the members of the committee, and that is planned for the next AFRINIC meeting in November 2016. Alan Barrett From silber.mike at gmail.com Mon Jul 11 08:39:57 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:39:57 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: <25C1B17D-D4A4-4356-910E-3AD4A9018E29@gmail.com> Hi Alan > On 11 Jul 2016, at 10:30, Alan Barrett wrote: > ? > I disagree that there has been no action. The Governnce Committee charter was drafted, received comments from the community, was edited to take comments into account, was approved by the community, and was approved by the Board. The next step is to elect/appoint the members of the committee, and that is planned for the next AFRINIC meeting in November 2016. > I acknowledge the work, but it seems your definition of action and mine differ :-) Still 2,5 years from conception to (hopefully) implementation is longer than the gestation period of an elephant (30 months vs only 22). I really hope our committee starts walking as quickly as a little pachyderm learns to do. From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Mon Jul 11 08:40:28 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:40:28 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: <7077E526-EDCE-48A8-9286-A0437D6DCBBD@nftconsult.com> Mike Thanks I appreciate your alternative views and I think we should openly discuss as more ideas come in for us to widely share so that we can come up with a shared final position. I accept some of my views might be wild but my suggestion right now is lets put all options on the table and work to find the best outcome. Your points bellow are noted and welcome. On 7/11/16, 11:23 AM, "Mike Silber" wrote: Hi Badru I agree with you that these issues should not be swept under the carpet, but I disagree on some of the alternatives you are suggesting. More in-line below. Regards Mike On 8 Jul 2016, at 16:21, Badru Ntege wrote: .. What has seemed to bring this discussion up in my opinion is the use of Mauritian law in some instances in the past by individuals to either circumvent or challenge the bylaws. Why is this necessary? Why do you persist with this sort of attach on ?individuals?. It really does you and your position as a leader in the community no credit and comes across as petty. There is a need to open dialogue on how the two are aligned to prevent us constantly coming to this issue. You have the issue exactly right - ALIGNMENT, not replacement! What we also need to separate that changing the jurisdiction if that ends up to be the only way should never be linked to moving the HQ. I think and feel Mauritius has been a good home for AfriNIC and should continue to be the home. What we need to then do is look at what would be the ideal registration process for a community ?bottom up? entity, and then engage our hosts to see if they are ready to give us that legal dispensation. Respectfully - I think that is precisely the incorrect approach. From my detailed knowledge of two jurisdictions and a passing knowledge of several others, we will have similar (or different) issues in almost every jurisdiction. We have AfriNIC the corporation and AfriNIC the community and the problem is the connection between the two - it is NOT the jurisdiction or the relevant company law. If we can get that interface correct - that should resolve most of the issues that have been identified. Personally I think there are some good lessons on what can be done (as well as what should not be done) in the IANA transition process. Seun and Fiona (as the most active from this community AFAIK) may want to comment here as well - but there are ways to ensure that the corporation ?belongs? to the community, while the staff can get on with running the corporation and the board can provide direction and oversight in accordance with their fiduciary obligations. The budget is a perfect example: the staff prepare the budget and execute against the approved budget, the board approves the budget ?. but where is the community. The community right now feels excluded. IMO the answer is not to hand the preparation or approval of the budget to the community! IMO the answer is to restructure the process to ensure the community is included in the preparation, the input of the community is sought before approval and the community is aware of performance against budget. First - that requires multi-year budgets, otherwise that process is too cumbersome. Second - that process can be built on top of almost any company law or jurisdictional requirements. In essence it is running DUAL STACK governance! It requires a bit of creativity and some problem solving skills, but it is a lot more effective that the binary options you are suggesting. Failing that we can then ask out of our 53 potential regional states which one is prepared to give us that dispensation so we can register in that state. Most countries allow company registrations in their jurisdiction. I am not sure what dispensation you are suggesting? I hope you are not suggesting we try create our own form of corporation? That is so capable of capture and the time and effort involved in making it up would be immense. I don?t think a ?make it up as we go along? approach or special dispensations subject to the whim of the leadership at the time is really what we are after. AfriNIC can then be registered in that country as a legal entity but still maintain its HQ in Mauritius. That is likely to have significant tax consequences. My suggestion as had been suggested a few years back a body of community members plus some board members be set up in an adhoc committee to explore this and make recommendations to the community at the next AGMM. I would propose that we rather use the (to be formed) governance committee to see how we can dual stack community governance and corporate governance. Personally I am VERY frustrated that we have been talking about a governance committee since Djibouti and have seen some useful documents - but no action. This is precisely the point for which the committee was mooted by Fiona - so why not use it instead of creating more ad hoc structures? _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Jul 11 08:42:56 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 11:42:56 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> <14D6C35F-F0AE-4A2D-90A3-C02BD9B6D24B@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: <7DE359DF-DD67-4EAC-9EFC-1F89E4FE6580@nftconsult.com> Alan On 7/11/16, 11:30 AM, "Alan Barrett" wrote: > >> On 11 Jul 2016, at 12:23, Mike Silber wrote: >> Personally I am VERY frustrated that we have been talking about a governance committee since Djibouti and have seen some useful documents - but no action. > >I disagree that there has been no action. The Governnce Committee charter was drafted, received comments from the community, was edited to take comments into account, was approved by the community, and was approved by the Board. The next step is to elect/appoint the members of the committee, and that is planned for the next AFRINIC meeting in November 2016. This could be taken as feedback that this process might have taken too long to conclude. We are more than 13 month in dscussion. Regards Badru > >Alan Barrett > > >_______________________________________________ >Community-Discuss mailing list >Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From madomey at hotmail.com Mon Jul 11 13:58:53 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 13:58:53 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com>,<577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Chair, In your email of June 30, 2016, you categorically promised to get back to the community after board meeting on the process around the fees proposed . Your promise to get back to the community came as the result of some questions asked on the process of introducing the new fees. Instead of responding to those vital questions, it is disappointing to serve the community with a "philosophical lecture" which unfortunately has fallen below the standard to convince community on what ?Bottom-up? means for them in the AFRINIC governance. Embarking on this ?philosophical lecture? is purely a diversionary tactics to mislead the community and sweep those questions under the carpet. The community is expecting the answers to those questions, PLEASE. Thanks Marcus To: community-discuss at afrinic.net From: sfolayan at gmail.com Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:11:44 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: AFRINIC - Matters Arising Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:10:27 +0100 From: Sunday Folayan To: members-discuss at afrinic.net Dear Members and the Community at large, Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related matters. Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the Board?s understanding of the status quo. It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies have. The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in discussions on any relevant matter. AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or from the community before making decisions, but there is no general requirement that they do so. Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members elect the Board. The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is the membership base. Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day operational handling. The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond only after they have received due consideration. Best Regards ... Sunday Folayan Chair, AFRINIC Board _______________________________________________ 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 benjamin.eshun at gmail.com Mon Jul 11 15:20:01 2016 From: benjamin.eshun at gmail.com (Benjamin Eshun) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 15:20:01 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <577F9880.8000203@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear Chair, +1. Not to put you on the spot, but since you campaigned for re-election on the ticket of a unifier and a bridge builder, the Board needs to show more effort in working with the community in major decisions in order to restore the needed confidence, good will and public trust. regards, Benjamin On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 1:58 PM, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > Dear Chair, > > In your email of June 30, 2016, you categorically promised to get back to > the community after board meeting on the process around the fees proposed > . Your promise to get back to the community came as the result of some > questions asked on the process of introducing the new fees. Instead of > responding to those vital questions, it is disappointing to serve the > community with a "philosophical lecture" which unfortunately has fallen > below the standard to convince community on what ?Bottom-up? means for them > in the AFRINIC governance. Embarking on this ?philosophical lecture? is > purely a diversionary tactics to mislead the community and sweep those > questions under the carpet. > > The community is expecting the answers to those questions, PLEASE. > > > Thanks > > > > Marcus > > > ------------------------------ > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > From: sfolayan at gmail.com > Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:11:44 +0100 > Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: AFRINIC - Matters Arising > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: AFRINIC - Matters Arising > Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 13:10:27 +0100 > From: Sunday Folayan > To: members-discuss at afrinic.net > > > Dear Members and the Community at large, > > Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: > > There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is > organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the > powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related > matters. > > Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the > Board?s understanding of the status quo. > > It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC > membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all > stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources > and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. > AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company > registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies > have. > > The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific > process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use > to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows > members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in > discussions on any relevant matter. > > AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by > guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of > 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. > Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the > Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. However, > the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) > almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. > > AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the > Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. > These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and > operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The > powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. > > The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or > from the community before making decisions, but there is no general > requirement that they do so. Even in cases where the Board or the > executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the > community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community > would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. > > The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members > elect the Board. The Board is also accountable to the community via the > subset that is the membership base. Neither the Members nor the > community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and > the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day > operational handling. > > The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond > only after they have received due consideration. > > Best Regards ... > > Sunday Folayan > Chair, AFRINIC Board > > > _______________________________________________ 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 Alain.Aina at wacren.net Mon Jul 11 15:35:11 2016 From: Alain.Aina at wacren.net (ALAIN AINA) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:35:11 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hello, > On Jul 8, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Sunday Folayan > wrote: > > Dear Members and the Community at large, > > Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: Thanks for sharing these thoughts, comments inline... > > There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related matters. > > Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the Board?s understanding of the status quo. > > It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies have. > > The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in discussions on any relevant matter. AFRNIC is committed to the Bottom-up Self-gorvenance model as per ICP-2 and the IANA report on AFRINIC accreditation. So it is a principle and well beyond philosophy. > > AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. The correct phrasing in the company act is "shall not have more than 25 members" How do you interpret this as we are in definition and clarification section ? Why don?t we fill the members up to 25 to improve accountability ? > Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. Which makes the Board of Directors accountable to themselves according to the company act. So question is : what is the contract between these 9 and the others ? This original arrangement comes with unwritten rules for the 9 to follow the community driven approach, bottom-up self-governance and consensus based decision making and act in the public trust. > However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. Nope. According to the company act, these members have no rights, except those granted to them by the 9. This works only if the unwritten rules are followed. This was the case until things changed recently and Company act and AFRINIC Ltd is put in front of other members and the community to justify BoD actions. A simple example is point 11 of the AFRINIC accountability assessment document provided to community for discussions on bylways changes: It states ====== Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi) , so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval ========== interpretation of ?member? gives right to the 9 to change the bylaws. So option is to limit that power, but to which extent? This justify the numerous proposals of amendment to the bylaws which have been submitted and a good summary of them can be seen through the two links below: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000343.html https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000350.html Concerns are that some of the changes required to change the accountability model of AFRINIC may not be applicable in the current context of Private company limited by guarantee in the Mauritius company act 2001. > > AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. You mentioned company act here as well ? > > The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or from the community before making decisions, but there is no general requirement that they do so. Being accountable to the community, means taking the decisions which match community desires, reporting and taking into considerations community views post decisions. > Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. > > The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members elect the Board. > The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is the membership base. Once elected, they became members and accountable to themselves. It is true as currently only board members can recall and vote out a board member. Other members can?t. > Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day operational handling. Agree > > The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond only after they have received due consideration. Good and hope together we build a better future for AFRINIC. It is worth mentioning that the current bylaws is the results of reviews done in 2012 and 2013 which tried to improve some aspects from previous one. http://afrinic.net/images/stories/Library/news-pub/by_com.pdf Hope this helps ?Alain -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Mon Jul 11 15:58:58 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:58:58 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <94FB0818-1127-4F23-90C6-17CCE926E849@nftconsult.com> Alain Thanks for this depth +1 Chair lets openly consider these views and I would really hope that all board members can openly share their views on this thread so we arrive at a position that works for the betterment of AfriNIC. Regards On 7/11/16, 6:35 PM, "ALAIN AINA" wrote: Hello, On Jul 8, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Sunday Folayan wrote: Dear Members and the Community at large, Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: Thanks for sharing these thoughts, comments inline... There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related matters. Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the Board?s understanding of the status quo. It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies have. The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in discussions on any relevant matter. AFRNIC is committed to the Bottom-up Self-gorvenance model as per ICP-2 and the IANA report on AFRINIC accreditation. So it is a principle and well beyond philosophy. AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. The correct phrasing in the company act is "shall not have more than 25 members" How do you interpret this as we are in definition and clarification section ? Why don?t we fill the members up to 25 to improve accountability ? Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. Which makes the Board of Directors accountable to themselves according to the company act. So question is : what is the contract between these 9 and the others ? This original arrangement comes with unwritten rules for the 9 to follow the community driven approach, bottom-up self-governance and consensus based decision making and act in the public trust. However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. Nope. According to the company act, these members have no rights, except those granted to them by the 9. This works only if the unwritten rules are followed. This was the case until things changed recently and Company act and AFRINIC Ltd is put in front of other members and the community to justify BoD actions. A simple example is point 11 of the AFRINIC accountability assessment document provided to community for discussions on bylways changes: It states ====== Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi) , so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval ========== interpretation of ?member? gives right to the 9 to change the bylaws. So option is to limit that power, but to which extent? This justify the numerous proposals of amendment to the bylaws which have been submitted and a good summary of them can be seen through the two links below: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000343.html https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000350.html Concerns are that some of the changes required to change the accountability model of AFRINIC may not be applicable in the current context of Private company limited by guarantee in the Mauritius company act 2001. AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. You mentioned company act here as well ? The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or from the community before making decisions, but there is no general requirement that they do so. Being accountable to the community, means taking the decisions which match community desires, reporting and taking into considerations community views post decisions. Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members elect the Board. The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is the membership base. Once elected, they became members and accountable to themselves. It is true as currently only board members can recall and vote out a board member. Other members can?t. Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day operational handling. Agree The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond only after they have received due consideration. Good and hope together we build a better future for AFRINIC. It is worth mentioning that the current bylaws is the results of reviews done in 2012 and 2013 which tried to improve some aspects from previous one. http://afrinic.net/images/stories/Library/news-pub/by_com.pdf Hope this helps ?Alain _______________________________________________ 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 honest1989 at gmail.com Mon Jul 11 16:39:00 2016 From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:39:00 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders Message-ID: To Chair / CEO of AFRINIC, >From the Strategic Plan shared, I see that the CoE were part of those who worked on the same in 2014. So I went through and read about the CoE and it is apparent that, the Council of Elders was created by the new Bylaws adopted in January 2013. So out of curiousity, is there any reason the former Chairman of Board before the current one, is not part of the current CoE? Because from the AFRINIC website link below, I dont see Mr Ntege mentioned and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of the CoE. http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders The above webpage was last updated in 2013.... Any reason its not up to date? Honest Ornella GANKPA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amelnaud at gmail.com Mon Jul 11 16:49:47 2016 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:49:47 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Strategy Document In-Reply-To: <0D788289-3BE3-4430-BA4B-B775B22740CA@afrinic.net> References: <4303AC99-CF81-4D0A-BDCE-B6979D469408@afrinic.net> <0D788289-3BE3-4430-BA4B-B775B22740CA@afrinic.net> Message-ID: Hi Mr. CEO Thanks for sharing this summary of the Strategic Plan. See comments and questions below. Now on strategic objectives: 1. ?Encourage awareness of IPv6?. Will AFRINIC be "encouraging IPv6 awareness in 2016-2020" OR ?encourage IPv6 deployment? ? Do we really have a strategic plan on IPv6 deployment beyong awareness.? 2. On the ?Improve WHOIS accuracy?. Do we have a strategy on the above too? We were told during AGMM in Gaborone that the future of AFRINIC is around ?Training? and ?Research and Innovation?, however, going through the shared 4 pages strategic plan, I can't seem to read that anywhere. Do you care to clarify further on the above points? Regards Arnaud Le 8 juil. 2016 12:08, "Alan Barrett" a ?crit : > FYI. The appended message was sent to the members-discuss list. > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > From: Alan Barrett > > Subject: Strategy Document > > Date: 8 July 2016 at 16:06:10 +0400 > > To: AfriNIC Discuss > > > > Dear Members, > > > > The AFRINIC Board has prepared the attached Strategy Document and > approved it for publication. This document is a summary of strategic > objectives and projects planned for the five years from 2016 to 2020. > > > > Alan Barrett > > CEO, AFRINIC > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 nishal at controlfreak.co.za Mon Jul 11 17:36:44 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:36:44 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of the > CoE. > http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders the url that you reference says: ?.. The AFRINIC Bylaw (Section 16) allows the Board to appoint..? ?allow? is not the same as ?automatic? to *this* native-english speaker. so, i looked up the bylaws. quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? i read that[1] ?shall?, as a SHOULD and not MUST (2119 style). you might read that differently, ?n. [1] though, of course, i don?t speak for the board :-) From noah at neo.co.tz Mon Jul 11 17:40:21 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:40:21 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <1779433128.1115269.1468254124967.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <94FB0818-1127-4F23-90C6-17CCE926E849@nftconsult.com> <1779433128.1115269.1468254124967.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 11 Jul 2016 19:33, "Walubengo J" wrote: > > @Badru, > > Last time I checked, the Chairman's written views were the deliberated and considered Board views. > > Am not sure if you have paid attension but Directors can still share views under "Their own capacity" and some have always done that. No harm in that.. Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From honest1989 at gmail.com Mon Jul 11 18:02:34 2016 From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:02:34 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: Hello Nishal My curiousity was objective and as such I will still request that someone who speaks for the board guide me on why the former Chair (Mr Ntege) was not appointed to the CoE.? Honest Ornella GANKPA Network engineer 2016-07-11 18:36 GMT+01:00 Nishal Goburdhan : > On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of the CoE. >> http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders >> > > the url that you reference says: > ?.. The AFRINIC Bylaw (Section 16) allows the Board to appoint..? > > ?allow? is not the same as ?automatic? to *this* native-english speaker. > > so, i looked up the bylaws. > quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 > > ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former > chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? > i read that[1] ?shall?, as a SHOULD and not MUST (2119 style). > > you might read that differently, > ?n. > > [1] though, of course, i don?t speak for the board :-) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 mje at posix.co.za Mon Jul 11 18:08:56 2016 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:08:56 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: <5783E0B8.2040503@posix.co.za> On 11/07/2016 20:02, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > Hello Nishal > > My curiousity was objective and as such I will still request that > someone who speaks for the board guide me on why the former Chair > (Mr Ntege) was not appointed to the CoE.? I believe it to be an honorary position. > Honest Ornella GANKPA > Network engineer > > > 2016-07-11 18:36 GMT+01:00 Nishal Goburdhan >: > > On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > and it seems that automatically every former chair become part > of the CoE. > http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders > > > the url that you reference says: > ?.. The AFRINIC Bylaw (Section 16) allows the Board to appoint..? > > ?allow? is not the same as ?automatic? to *this* native-english speaker. > > so, i looked up the bylaws. > quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 > > ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former > chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? > i read that[1] ?shall?, as a SHOULD and not MUST (2119 style). > > you might read that differently, > ?n. > > [1] though, of course, i don?t speak for the board :-) > > _______________________________________________ > 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/pkcs7-signature Size: 4230 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From madomey at hotmail.com Mon Jul 11 18:32:44 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:32:44 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> References: , <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: Hi Nishal, Why respond to this email when it is specifically addressed to the CEO and the Chair? Do we have to be a non - native English speaker to understand that? Marcus > From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:36:44 +0200 > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > > On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > > and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of the > > CoE. > > http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders > > the url that you reference says: > ?.. The AFRINIC Bylaw (Section 16) allows the Board to appoint..? > > ?allow? is not the same as ?automatic? to *this* native-english > speaker. > > so, i looked up the bylaws. > quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 > > ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former > chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? > i read that[1] ?shall?, as a SHOULD and not MUST (2119 style). > > you might read that differently, > ?n. > > [1] though, of course, i don?t speak for the board :-) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 mje at posix.co.za Mon Jul 11 18:40:18 2016 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:40:18 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5783E812.9040707@posix.co.za> On 11/07/2016 17:35, ALAIN AINA wrote: > Hello, > >> On Jul 8, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Sunday Folayan > > wrote: >> >> Dear Members and the Community at large, >> >> Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: > > Thanks for sharing these thoughts, comments inline... > >> >> There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is >> organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the >> powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related >> matters. >> >> Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the >> Board?s understanding of the status quo. >> >> It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC >> membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all >> stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including >> resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the >> community. AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a >> company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that >> companies have. >> >> The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific >> process. The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we >> use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also >> allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or >> participate in discussions on any relevant matter. > > AFRNIC is committed to the Bottom-up Self-gorvenance model as per ICP-2 > and the IANA report on AFRINIC accreditation. So it is a principle and > well beyond philosophy. ICP-2: Criteria for Establishment of New Regional Internet Registries - (3: Bottom-up self-governance structure for setting local policies) is reference to bottom up and *specifically* refers to the Policy Process. In AFRINIC's case, we do that just fine. https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/new-rirs-criteria-2012-02-25-en >> AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by >> guarantee. In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of >> 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members. > > The correct phrasing in the company act is "shall not have more than 25 > members" > > How do you interpret this as we are in definition and clarification > section ? > > Why don?t we fill the members up to 25 to improve accountability ? > >> Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the >> Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. > > Which makes the Board of Directors accountable to themselves according > to the company act. So question is : what is the contract between these > 9 and the others ? > > This original arrangement comes with unwritten rules for the 9 to > follow the community driven approach, bottom-up self-governance and > consensus based decision making and act in the public trust. > >> However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource >> Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal >> company. > > Nope. According to the company act, these members have no rights, > except those granted to them by the 9. This works only if the unwritten > rules are followed. > This was the case until things changed recently and Company act and > AFRINIC Ltd is put in front of other members and the community to > justify BoD actions. > > A simple example is point 11 of the AFRINIC accountability assessment > document provided to community for discussions on bylways changes: > > It states > > ====== > Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the > AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that > the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the > Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by > all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi) , so that the Registered > Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without > broader approval > ========== > > interpretation of ?member? gives right to the 9 to change the bylaws. > So option is to limit that power, but to which extent? > > This justify the numerous proposals of amendment to the bylaws which > have been submitted and a good summary of them can be seen through the > two links below: > > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000343.html > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000350.html > > Concerns are that some of the changes required to change the > accountability model of AFRINIC may not be applicable in the current > context of Private company limited by guarantee in the Mauritius > company act 2001. > >> >> AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the >> Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. >> These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and >> operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The >> powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. > > You mentioned company act here as well ? >> >> The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or >> from the community before making decisions, but there is no general >> requirement that they do so. > > Being accountable to the community, means taking the decisions which > match community desires, reporting and taking into considerations > community views post decisions. > > >> Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly >> invite comments, the members or the community are free to make >> suggestions. If the members or the community would like more >> consultation, they are also free to ask for that. >> >> The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the >> Members elect the Board. >> The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is >> the membership base. > > Once elected, they became members and accountable to themselves. It is > true as currently only board members can recall and vote out a board > member. Other members can?t. > >> Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to >> day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight >> function rather than day to day operational handling. > > Agree > >> >> The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may >> respond only after they have received due consideration. > > Good and hope together we build a better future for AFRINIC. > > It is worth mentioning that the current bylaws is the results of > reviews done in 2012 and 2013 which tried to improve some aspects from > previous one. > > http://afrinic.net/images/stories/Library/news-pub/by_com.pdf > > Hope this helps > > ?Alain > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/pkcs7-signature Size: 4230 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From nishal at controlfreak.co.za Tue Jul 12 01:57:16 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 03:57:16 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: On 11 Jul 2016, at 20:32, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > Hi Nishal, hi marcus, > Why respond to this email when it is specifically addressed to the CEO > and the Chair? i believe the CEO?s email address is: ceo [at] afrinic.net. or, it used to be; the afrinic team can help you with that. you probably want a ticket number, so you should likely mail contact [at] afrinic.net. to post to this *public* mailing list, you can send mail to: community-discuss [at] afrinic.net. more information on the list is located in the footer of this message. > Do we have to be a non - native English speaker to understand that? i don?t purport to understand anyone, other than myself. >> From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za >> To: community-discuss at afrinic.net >> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 19:36:44 +0200 >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders >> >> On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: >> >>> and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of >>> the >>> CoE. >>> http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders >> >> the url that you reference says: >> ?.. The AFRINIC Bylaw (Section 16) allows the Board to appoint..? >> >> ?allow? is not the same as ?automatic? to *this* >> native-english >> speaker. >> >> so, i looked up the bylaws. >> quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 >> >> ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former >> chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? >> i read that[1] ?shall?, as a SHOULD and not MUST (2119 style). >> >> you might read that differently, >> ?n. >> >> [1] though, of course, i don?t speak for the board :-) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 alan.barrett at afrinic.net Tue Jul 12 07:32:58 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 11:32:58 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7B683280-9ABA-4B41-A7A9-69C0DA6D227E@afrinic.net> > On 11 Jul 2016, at 20:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > So out of curiousity, is there any reason the former Chairman of Board before the current one, is not part of the current CoE? I will not comment on that. > Because from the AFRINIC website link below, I dont see Mr Ntege mentioned and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of the CoE. > > http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders > > The above webpage was last updated in 2013.... Any reason its not up to date? I don?t see any information that is out of date. There have been no changes to the CoE since the page was last edited. Alan Barrett From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Jul 12 07:55:49 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:55:49 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <7B683280-9ABA-4B41-A7A9-69C0DA6D227E@afrinic.net> References: <7B683280-9ABA-4B41-A7A9-69C0DA6D227E@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On 12 Jul 2016 10:36, "Alan Barrett" wrote: > > > > On 11 Jul 2016, at 20:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > So out of curiousity, is there any reason the former Chairman of Board before the current one, is not part of the current CoE? > > I will not comment on that. > Hi Alan, Any reason you cant comment? [1] > > > Alan Barrett > Noah [1] Remember the CoE element is stipulated in the bylaws and we cant just disregard a need for clarification. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Jul 12 07:57:40 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:57:40 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <5783E0B8.2040503@posix.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <5783E0B8.2040503@posix.co.za> Message-ID: On 11 Jul 2016 21:10, "Mark Elkins" wrote: > > > > On 11/07/2016 20:02, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > Hello Nishal > > > > My curiousity was objective and as such I will still request that > > someone who speaks for the board guide me on why the former Chair > > (Mr Ntege) was not appointed to the CoE.? > > I believe it to be an honorary position. > Right! ..... Yet it was considered and added in the AFRINIC bylawys.. > > -- > Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jwalu at yahoo.com Mon Jul 11 16:22:04 2016 From: jwalu at yahoo.com (Walubengo J) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:22:04 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising In-Reply-To: <94FB0818-1127-4F23-90C6-17CCE926E849@nftconsult.com> References: <577F9833.8060301@gmail.com> <94FB0818-1127-4F23-90C6-17CCE926E849@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: <1779433128.1115269.1468254124967.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> @Badru, Last time I checked, the Chairman's written views were the deliberated and considered Board views ?- except ofcourse when participating in Policy Development. But that may perhaps have changed with time.... @Alain,Your English is quite deep and concise for someone from Francophone Africa?. ?I wish I could write my french quite as deeply. Either way, you do have some good points worth considering. walu. From: Badru Ntege To: General Discussions of AFRINIC ; AfriNIC Discuss Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 6:58 PM Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC - Matters Arising Alain Thanks for this depth ?+1 Chair lets openly consider these views and I would really hope that all board members can openly share their views on this thread so we arrive at a position that works for the betterment of AfriNIC. Regards On 7/11/16, 6:35 PM, "ALAIN AINA" wrote: Hello, On Jul 8, 2016, at 4:10 PM, Sunday Folayan wrote: Dear Members and the Community at large, Further to my email of 30th June 2016, I will like to share some thoughts: Thanks for sharing these thoughts, comments inline... There seem to be differing interpretations of the way AFRINIC is organised, the powers of the Board, the powers of the Members, the powers of the Community, the bottom-up philosophy, and other related matters. Some definitions and clarifications are appropriate, to explain the Board?s understanding of the status quo. It is necessary to distinguish between the AFRINIC community, AFRINIC membership, and AFRINIC Ltd as a company. The community includes all stakeholders and beneficiaries of AFRINIC?s efforts, including resources and other benefits. The membership is a subset of the community. ?AFRINIC Ltd is a membership-driven organisation, with a company registration, bylaws, directors, and all the other things that companies have. The phrase ?Bottom-Up? refers to a philosophy and not a specific process. ?The bottom-up philosophy is used in the processes that we use to develop policies, elect the Board, change the Bylaws, and also allows members or the community at large to make suggestions or participate in discussions on any relevant matter. ?AFRNIC is committed to the Bottom-up Self-gorvenance model as per ICP-2 and the IANA report on AFRINIC accreditation. So it is a ?principle and well beyond philosophy.? AFRINIC Ltd. is registered in Mauritius as a company limited by guarantee. ?In terms of the Companies Act of Mauritius (Act no 15 of 2001), such a company may not have more than 25 (twenty-five) members.? The correct phrasing in the company act ?is "shall not have more than 25 members" How do you interpret this as we are in definition and clarification section ? Why don?t we fill the members up to 25 ?to improve accountability ?? ?Because of this, the Bylaws state that only the nine Directors (the Board) are Registered Members in terms of the Companies Act. ? Which makes the Board of Directors ?accountable to themselves according to the company act. ?So question is : what is the contract between these 9 and the others ? ?This original arrangement comes with unwritten rules for the 9 to follow the community driven approach, bottom-up self-governance and consensus based decision making and act in the public trust.? However, the Bylaws give the broader membership (specifically Resource Members) almost all of the rights shareholders would enjoy in a normal company. Nope. ?According to the company act, these members have no rights, except those granted to them by the 9. ?This works only if the unwritten rules are followed.This was the case until things changed recently ?and Company act and AFRINIC Ltd is ?put in front of other members and the community to justify BoD actions. A simple ?example is point 11 of the AFRINIC ?accountability assessment ?document provided to community for ?discussions on bylways changes: It states ======Modification to the Bylaws or Constitution: The Bylaws say how the AFRINIC Members may change the Bylaws, but the Companies Act say that the Registered Members can change it. Consider requiring that the Bylaws/Constitution may be changed only after a Special Resolution by all AFRINIC Members in terms of Bylaws 7.6(vi) , so that the Registered Members (the same nine people as the Directors) cannot act without broader approval========== interpretation of ?member? ?gives right to the 9 to change the bylaws. ?So option is to limit that power, but to which extent? This justify the numerous proposals of amendment to the bylaws which have been submitted ?and a good summary of them can be seen through the two links below: https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000343.htmlhttps://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/2016-June/000350.html Concerns are that some of the changes required to change the accountability ?model ?of AFRINIC may not be applicable ?in the current context of Private company limited by guarantee ?in the Mauritius company act 2001. AFRINIC Ltd. is run by an executive that reports to the Board, and the Board exercises their fiduciary responsibilities to guide the Company. These responsibilities include the areas of sustainability and operational efficiency which also includes the setting of fees. The powers utilised are granted by the bylaws and the companies act. You mentioned company act here as well ? The Board or the executive may ask for comments from the membership or from the community before making decisions, but there is no general requirement that they do so.? Being accountable to the community, means taking the decisions which match community desires, reporting and taking into ?considerations community views post decisions. Even in cases where the Board or the executive do not explicitly invite comments, the members or the community are free to make suggestions. If the members or the community would like more consultation, they are also free to ask for that. The Board of Directors is accountable to the Members in that the Members elect the Board. ?The Board is also accountable to the community via the subset that is the membership base. Once elected, they became members and accountable to themselves. It is true as currently only board members can recall and vote out a board ?member. Other members can?t. ? ?Neither the Members nor the community have power over the day to day operations of the company, and the Board exercises an oversight function rather than day to day operational handling. Agree The Board and the executive note all comments submitted, and may respond only after they have received due consideration. Good and hope together we build a better future for AFRINIC.? It is worth ?mentioning ?that the current bylaws is the results of reviews done in 2012 and 2013 which ?tried to improve some aspects from previous one.? http://afrinic.net/images/stories/Library/news-pub/by_com.pdf Hope this helps ?Alain _______________________________________________Community-Discuss mailing listCommunity-Discuss at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-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: From john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng Tue Jul 12 08:30:49 2016 From: john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng (John Ngwoke) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:30:49 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <5783E0B8.2040503@posix.co.za> Message-ID: My personal opinion on this is; Going forward this should be address since it is clearly stated in the AFRINIC bylaw. Mr. Ntege served as the Chair, so i support the motion of including him as one of the CoE since the AFRINIC bylaw support upto 6 members "16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number of members of the council does not exceed six (6)." and we have only 4 members of the CoE now. On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 8:57 AM, Noah wrote: > > On 11 Jul 2016 21:10, "Mark Elkins" wrote: > > > > > > > > On 11/07/2016 20:02, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > > Hello Nishal > > > > > > My curiousity was objective and as such I will still request that > > > someone who speaks for the board guide me on why the former Chair > > > (Mr Ntege) was not appointed to the CoE.? > > > > I believe it to be an honorary position. > > > > Right! ..... > > Yet it was considered and added in the AFRINIC bylawys.. > > > > > -- > > Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems > > Noah > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- *John C. Ngwoke (JP)*Head, Network section ICT *University of Nigeria*Nsukka 410001 *web: http://www.unn.edu.ng * *Mobile: +2348035723901, +23407017059403* *Skype: john.ngwoke* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From honest1989 at gmail.com Tue Jul 12 09:32:31 2016 From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:32:31 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: Hello Nishal My comments are inline 2016-07-11 18:36 GMT+01:00 Nishal Goburdhan : > On 11 Jul 2016, at 18:39, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > and it seems that automatically every former chair become part of the CoE. >> http://afrinic.net/en/about/our-structure/council-of-elders >> > > the url that you reference says: > ?.. The AFRINIC Bylaw (Section 16) allows the Board to appoint..? > > ?allow? is not the same as ?automatic? to *this* native-english speaker. > If the position is not automatic, then on which criteria are the elders selected? What is the process of selection ? Aside from serving one full term as chair > > so, i looked up the bylaws. > quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 > > ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former > chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? > i read that[1] ?shall?, as a SHOULD and not MUST (2119 style). > Does that mean some former chairs are barred from the selection process? Again on which criteria? > you might read that differently, > ?n. > > [1] though, of course, i don?t speak for the board :-) > Honest Ornella GANKPA > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jul 12 10:04:20 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:04:20 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Strategy Document In-Reply-To: References: <4303AC99-CF81-4D0A-BDCE-B6979D469408@afrinic.net> <6E502262-78C5-4EC9-A91B-3A5821ADBE10@nftconsult.com> <3D8811CE-A9F9-4CE3-A71F-1DA9151BF495@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On 12 Jul 2016 12:19, "Randy Bush" wrote: > > > I think you may be confusing strategy with tactics. > > this problem seems pervasive, and may have its root cause in a desire to > micro-manage the board and exec. > Well duplicity seems to be also pervasive ?. Strategy and tactics must work in tandem. Strategy should provide clear organizational goals, guideposts and key performance measurements. It also has to be executable so should have tactical plans. > randy > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nishal at controlfreak.co.za Tue Jul 12 11:04:30 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:04:30 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> On 12 Jul 2016, at 11:32, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > Hello Nishal > If the position is not automatic, in reading the text, this does appear to be the case. > then on which criteria are the elders > selected? What is the process of selection ? the bylaws do not specify. just like how they don?t specify criteria selection for nomcom. or a CEO. or .. that?s a level of operational detail that?s not useful in bylaws. i voted in responsible people; i trust they can do this without my attempted micromanagement. ?n. From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net Tue Jul 12 11:26:32 2016 From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:26:32 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: On 12 July 2016 at 12:04, Nishal Goburdhan wrote: > On 12 Jul 2016, at 11:32, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: > > Hello Nishal >> If the position is not automatic, >> > > in reading the text, this does appear to be the case. > > > then on which criteria are the elders >> selected? What is the process of selection ? >> > > the bylaws do not specify. just like how they don?t specify criteria > selection for nomcom. or a CEO. or .. > that?s a level of operational detail that?s not useful in bylaws. > > i voted in responsible people; i trust they can do this without my > attempted micromanagement. Let's get off this micromanagement train. The issues that are being raised are often cogent. This is clearly a question of misunderstanding rather than an issue of micromanagement. The bylaws specify that "There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organisation as former Chairs." It goes further in 16.2 to describe how this is managed. Shall is authoritative. Any other interpretation is disingenuous. In 16.3, the bylaws restricts the tenure of members to one term and forbids re-appointment. If it were not automatic, how is the board expected to comply? Honest, you have asked a good question. Why is Mr Ntege not in the CoE? Are we complying with the requirements of the bylaws? -- Omo Oaiya CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN Mobile: +234 808 888 1571 , +221 784 305 224 Skype: kodion http://www.wacren.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Jul 12 12:59:13 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 15:59:13 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: > On 12 July 2016 at 12:04, Nishal Goburdhan wrote: >> >> On 12 Jul 2016, at 11:32, Honest Ornella GANKPA wrote: >> > Hi @Ornella and @Nishal >> >>> then on which criteria are the elders >>> selected? What is the process of selection ? >> >> >> the bylaws do not specify. just like how they don?t specify criteria selection for nomcom. or a CEO. or .. >> that?s a level of operational detail that?s not useful in bylaws. >> > 1. But since it says below ... quoting: http://afrinic.net/en/about/bylaws?start=15 ?16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. ? 2. And quoting August 2013 Resolution 201308.178 : http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bod/meeting/2013 "The Board resolves to appoint Mr Badru Ntege as Chairman of the AFRINIC Board for a one year term ending on 30 June 2014. " 3. And then quoting the 2014 Resolution 201408.201 http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bod/meeting/2014 Then the question Ornella asked in her original email of this thread have some substance and ought to be responded too by the concerned parties.... Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Alain.Aina at wacren.net Tue Jul 12 12:59:49 2016 From: Alain.Aina at wacren.net (ALAIN AINA) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:59:49 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Strategy Document In-Reply-To: References: <4303AC99-CF81-4D0A-BDCE-B6979D469408@afrinic.net> <6E502262-78C5-4EC9-A91B-3A5821ADBE10@nftconsult.com> <3D8811CE-A9F9-4CE3-A71F-1DA9151BF495@afrinic.net> Message-ID: > On Jul 12, 2016, at 2:33 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > >>>> I think you may be confusing strategy with tactics. >>> this problem seems pervasive, and may have its root cause in a desire to >>> micro-manage the board and exec. >> Well duplicity seems to be also pervasive > > qed, i guess > >> Strategy and tactics must work in tandem. >> Strategy should provide clear >> organizational goals, guideposts and key performance measurements. >> It also has to be executable so should have tactical plans. > > delegation, responsibility&authority, which go hand in hand, yes, and without forgetting collective accountability in our case > and trust. The key word. First job of great leader is to inspire trust?. Thanks ?Alain > > randy > > _______________________________________________ > Members-Discuss mailing list > Members-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss From sfolayan at gmail.com Tue Jul 12 19:25:51 2016 From: sfolayan at gmail.com (Sunday Folayan) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 20:25:51 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss] Matters Arising - Further clarification In-Reply-To: <57853BB5.3080308@gmail.com> References: <57853BB5.3080308@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5785443F.2050105@gmail.com> -------- Forwarded Message -------- Dear AFRINIC Members and Community, I would like to offer some additional clarifications on issues being discussed. 1. Strategic Document This is not a radical departure from past strategic plans, in outline. Indeed, this is an enhancement of the unpublished 2014-2018 plan. The management uses the strategic document to plan activities and to propose budgets for each year. It should be stated that micro management of the executives by the Board is not in the best interest of AFRINIC. 2. Board-Community Relations The Board welcomes proposals and solutions on issues at all times. The board believes that all comments should be made in a manner that is respectful and gives recognition to the fact that there may be opposing views. In particular, comments that imply wrongdoing but do not give details of the alleged infraction are not encouraged or welcomed. 3. Fees. The recent change in the allocation fee charges was merely a clarification and it only affects members with new allocation requests; it has no effect on existing members who do not request additional number resources. As already indicated, the setting of fees is a Board responsibility. Any member is welcome to comment on the fee structure or to make their own proposal at any time, and such comments or proposals will be duly considered at the time of the next fee review. 4. Membership of CoE The Bylaws section 16 gives the Board the power to consider former Chairpersons of AFRINIC for appointment to the Council of Elders. The Board has not formally discussed appointing the former Chairman in question to the CoE, but we will add a discussion of this issue to the agenda of the next Board meeting. Thanks and Regards? Sunday Folayan Chair, AFRINIC Board From nishal at controlfreak.co.za Tue Jul 12 19:45:55 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 21:45:55 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> On 12 Jul 2016, at 13:26, Omo Oaiya wrote: > Let's get off this micromanagement train. yes indeed, let?s! > "There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising > a > maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the > Board. > Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the > organisation as former Chairs." ok, so, let?s break it down, shall we? ?there shall be a council? ?> and indeed, there is one. ?..appointed by the board..? ?> it?s clear to me, that the decision to appoint (or not) is left to the board, since, those are the words, verbatim, from the bylaws. ?..comprising a maximum of six former chairpersons..? ?> so, no more than six. t?mam? what?s unclear is probably the following: * there is an _implied assumption_ (the original message in this thread) that the appointment is automatic. there is no text to support that, so i would call that assumption incorrect. (should there be text to this effect is a different question) * there is an _implied assumption_ that *every* ex-chair should be on the CoE. there is no text to support that either. * there is an _implied assumption_ that there is a term limit (in number of years). it?s true that there is one term limit, but there is no > It goes further in 16.2 to describe how this is managed. > Shall is authoritative. and indeed there is a committee; there?s no debate over that. but ?shall? does not imply ?automatic?, as you?re suggesting below. > Any other interpretation is disingenuous. really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. because an interpretation does not match your own, does *not* make that interpretation incorrect. i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, to me, seems correct from *my* reading of the text. > In 16.3, the bylaws restricts the tenure of members to one term and > forbids > re-appointment. If it were not automatic, how is the board expected > to > comply? i read this as (and *my* mostly monosyllabical explanation follows) * there is a council * it can have up to six ex-chairs * the council members are appointed by the board * when it gets to six, the first to join the council has to drop off to keep this at six i count a current council of 4. which means, to me, that the bylaws are respected. i don?t know why badru didn?t make the council. (i might even like to, but that?s besides the point). but the decision to appoint or not, seems squarely to be the prerogative of the board. and not an automatic process. ?n. From silber.mike at gmail.com Tue Jul 12 20:03:11 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:03:11 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Nishal +1 Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > On 12 Jul 2016, at 21:45, Nishal Goburdhan wrote: > >> On 12 Jul 2016, at 13:26, Omo Oaiya wrote: >> >> Let's get off this micromanagement train. > > yes indeed, let?s! > > >> "There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a >> maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. >> Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the >> organisation as former Chairs." > > ok, so, let?s break it down, shall we? > > ?there shall be a council? > ?> and indeed, there is one. > > ?..appointed by the board..? > ?> it?s clear to me, that the decision to appoint (or not) is left to the board, since, those are the words, verbatim, from the bylaws. > > ?..comprising a maximum of six former chairpersons..? > ?> so, no more than six. > > t?mam? > > what?s unclear is probably the following: > * there is an _implied assumption_ (the original message in this thread) that the appointment is automatic. there is no text to support that, so i would call that assumption incorrect. (should there be text to this effect is a different question) > * there is an _implied assumption_ that *every* ex-chair should be on the CoE. there is no text to support that either. > * there is an _implied assumption_ that there is a term limit (in number of years). it?s true that there is one term limit, but there is no > > >> It goes further in 16.2 to describe how this is managed. >> Shall is authoritative. > > and indeed there is a committee; there?s no debate over that. > but ?shall? does not imply ?automatic?, as you?re suggesting below. > > >> Any other interpretation is disingenuous. > > really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. because an interpretation does not match your own, does *not* make that interpretation incorrect. > i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, to me, seems correct from *my* reading of the text. > > >> In 16.3, the bylaws restricts the tenure of members to one term and forbids >> re-appointment. If it were not automatic, how is the board expected to >> comply? > > i read this as (and *my* mostly monosyllabical explanation follows) > * there is a council > * it can have up to six ex-chairs > * the council members are appointed by the board > * when it gets to six, the first to join the council has to drop off to keep this at six > > i count a current council of 4. which means, to me, that the bylaws are respected. > i don?t know why badru didn?t make the council. (i might even like to, but that?s besides the point). > but the decision to appoint or not, seems squarely to be the prerogative of the board. and not an automatic process. > > ?n. > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From evelyngeek at gmail.com Tue Jul 12 20:21:40 2016 From: evelyngeek at gmail.com (Evelyn Namara) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 23:21:40 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: ./All, Just out of curiosity, have all former chairpersons served on the CoE with Badru being the exception? (This is regardless of whether it is automatic or otherwise) If the answer is yes - What criteria does the board use to deem a former chair worthy of a sit on the CoE? On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Mike Silber wrote: > Nishal +1 > > Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, > or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to > be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a > director. > > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, > or a convict. > > So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > > > On 12 Jul 2016, at 21:45, Nishal Goburdhan > wrote: > > > >> On 12 Jul 2016, at 13:26, Omo Oaiya wrote: > >> > >> Let's get off this micromanagement train. > > > > yes indeed, let?s! > > > > > >> "There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a > >> maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the > Board. > >> Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the > >> organisation as former Chairs." > > > > ok, so, let?s break it down, shall we? > > > > ?there shall be a council? > > ?> and indeed, there is one. > > > > ?..appointed by the board..? > > ?> it?s clear to me, that the decision to appoint (or not) is left to > the board, since, those are the words, verbatim, from the bylaws. > > > > ?..comprising a maximum of six former chairpersons..? > > ?> so, no more than six. > > > > t?mam? > > > > what?s unclear is probably the following: > > * there is an _implied assumption_ (the original message in this thread) > that the appointment is automatic. there is no text to support that, so i > would call that assumption incorrect. (should there be text to this effect > is a different question) > > * there is an _implied assumption_ that *every* ex-chair should be on > the CoE. there is no text to support that either. > > * there is an _implied assumption_ that there is a term limit (in number > of years). it?s true that there is one term limit, but there is no > > > > > >> It goes further in 16.2 to describe how this is managed. > >> Shall is authoritative. > > > > and indeed there is a committee; there?s no debate over that. > > but ?shall? does not imply ?automatic?, as you?re suggesting below. > > > > > >> Any other interpretation is disingenuous. > > > > really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. because an interpretation > does not match your own, does *not* make that interpretation incorrect. > > i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, to > me, seems correct from *my* reading of the text. > > > > > >> In 16.3, the bylaws restricts the tenure of members to one term and > forbids > >> re-appointment. If it were not automatic, how is the board expected to > >> comply? > > > > i read this as (and *my* mostly monosyllabical explanation follows) > > * there is a council > > * it can have up to six ex-chairs > > * the council members are appointed by the board > > * when it gets to six, the first to join the council has to drop off to > keep this at six > > > > i count a current council of 4. which means, to me, that the bylaws are > respected. > > i don?t know why badru didn?t make the council. (i might even like to, > but that?s besides the point). > > but the decision to appoint or not, seems squarely to be the prerogative > of the board. and not an automatic process. > > > > ?n. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -- Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Tue Jul 12 21:17:30 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:17:30 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: Having looked at this from several angles, I think I see the source of confusion? Section 16 in its entirety reads: 16 THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organisation as former Chairs. 16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. 16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number of members of the council does not exceed six (6). 16.3 On the completion of their tenure of office, members of this Council shall retire and not be eligible for re-appointment. 16.4 This Council shall have an advisory role and shall provide help and assistance to the Chair or the entire Board. The shall in the first paragraph does not make appointment automatic, but serves to limit the membership on the CoE. I agree this sentence could have been written better, but in essence, it states that to be eligible for appointment by the board, you must be a former chair that served at least one full term in that capacity. It?s not clear whether this means a 1-year term of chairman or a 3-year term on the board where you spent that entire term as chair. However, this particular minutiae may not be relevant to the question at hand. Nonetheless, taken out of context, I can understand how some would read 16.1 to imply automatic appointment. However, in the context of the opening paragraph to which 16.1 is subordinate, it is quite clear that it is a limit on eligibility and not a call for automatic appointment. The board cannot appoint me to the CoE at this time, as I have never been chairman of the AfriNIC board. They may, at their discretion, choose to appoint (or not) Badru. As to the criteria they use, I would say that each member of the board probably uses their own sound judgment and that there is no set criteria on which this is based other than the very limited set of constraints set out in section 16 of the bylaws. Personally, I have enough trust and faith in the AfriNIC board to believe that they are quite capable of deciding whether or not to appoint any given former chair to the CoE. Sunday has stated that the matter will be decided by the board at their next meeting. At this point, I?d say there?s nothing more to see here until the board makes their decision. I would also like to encourage people to accept the decision of the board, whatever it is, whether or not they agree with it. If you don?t like the way the board decides the issue, you can always vote for different board members in the next election. Owen > On Jul 12, 2016, at 13:21 , Evelyn Namara wrote: > > ./All, > > Just out of curiosity, have all former chairpersons served on the CoE with Badru being the exception? (This is regardless of whether it is automatic or otherwise) > If the answer is yes - > What criteria does the board use to deem a former chair worthy of a sit on the CoE? > > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Mike Silber > wrote: > Nishal +1 > > Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. > > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. > > So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > > > On 12 Jul 2016, at 21:45, Nishal Goburdhan > wrote: > > > >> On 12 Jul 2016, at 13:26, Omo Oaiya wrote: > >> > >> Let's get off this micromanagement train. > > > > yes indeed, let?s! > > > > > >> "There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a > >> maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. > >> Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the > >> organisation as former Chairs." > > > > ok, so, let?s break it down, shall we? > > > > ?there shall be a council? > > ?> and indeed, there is one. > > > > ?..appointed by the board..? > > ?> it?s clear to me, that the decision to appoint (or not) is left to the board, since, those are the words, verbatim, from the bylaws. > > > > ?..comprising a maximum of six former chairpersons..? > > ?> so, no more than six. > > > > t?mam? > > > > what?s unclear is probably the following: > > * there is an _implied assumption_ (the original message in this thread) that the appointment is automatic. there is no text to support that, so i would call that assumption incorrect. (should there be text to this effect is a different question) > > * there is an _implied assumption_ that *every* ex-chair should be on the CoE. there is no text to support that either. > > * there is an _implied assumption_ that there is a term limit (in number of years). it?s true that there is one term limit, but there is no > > > > > >> It goes further in 16.2 to describe how this is managed. > >> Shall is authoritative. > > > > and indeed there is a committee; there?s no debate over that. > > but ?shall? does not imply ?automatic?, as you?re suggesting below. > > > > > >> Any other interpretation is disingenuous. > > > > really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. because an interpretation does not match your own, does *not* make that interpretation incorrect. > > i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, to me, seems correct from *my* reading of the text. > > > > > >> In 16.3, the bylaws restricts the tenure of members to one term and forbids > >> re-appointment. If it were not automatic, how is the board expected to > >> comply? > > > > i read this as (and *my* mostly monosyllabical explanation follows) > > * there is a council > > * it can have up to six ex-chairs > > * the council members are appointed by the board > > * when it gets to six, the first to join the council has to drop off to keep this at six > > > > i count a current council of 4. which means, to me, that the bylaws are respected. > > i don?t know why badru didn?t make the council. (i might even like to, but that?s besides the point). > > but the decision to appoint or not, seems squarely to be the prerogative of the board. and not an automatic process. > > > > ?n. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > -- > > > Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara > > PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng Tue Jul 12 21:38:12 2016 From: john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng (John Ngwoke) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 22:38:12 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: +1 I agree with Owen. Since the chair Sunday has assured us that this matter will be treated by the board in their next meeting. We have confidence in the board members, that is why we voted them. So we have to trust them on this, knowing that what ever decision they will arrive at will be in the interest of AFRINIC. On 12 Jul 2016 10:20 pm, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > Having looked at this from several angles, I think I see the source of > confusion? > > > Section 16 in its entirety reads: > > 16 THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS > > There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a > maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. > Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the > organisation as former Chairs. > > 16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former chairpersons > who served at least one full term in that capacity. > > 16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number > of members of the council does not exceed six (6). > > 16.3 On the completion of their tenure of office, members of this Council > shall retire and not be eligible for re-appointment. > > 16.4 This Council shall have an advisory role and shall provide help and > assistance to the Chair or the entire Board. > > The shall in the first paragraph does not make appointment automatic, but > serves to limit the membership on the CoE. I agree this sentence could have > been written better, but in essence, it states that to be eligible for > appointment by the board, you must be a former chair that served at least > one full term in that capacity. It?s not clear whether this means a 1-year > term of chairman or a 3-year term on the board where you spent that entire > term as chair. However, this particular minutiae may not be relevant to the > question at hand. > > Nonetheless, taken out of context, I can understand how some would read > 16.1 to imply automatic appointment. > > However, in the context of the opening paragraph to which 16.1 is > subordinate, it is quite clear that it is a limit on eligibility and not a > call for automatic appointment. > > The board cannot appoint me to the CoE at this time, as I have never been > chairman of the AfriNIC board. They may, at their discretion, choose to > appoint (or not) Badru. > > As to the criteria they use, I would say that each member of the board > probably uses their own sound judgment and that there is no set criteria on > which this is based other than the very limited set of constraints set out > in section 16 of the bylaws. > > Personally, I have enough trust and faith in the AfriNIC board to believe > that they are quite capable of deciding whether or not to appoint any given > former chair to the CoE. Sunday has stated that the matter will be decided > by the board at their next meeting. > > At this point, I?d say there?s nothing more to see here until the board > makes their decision. I would also like to encourage people to accept the > decision of the board, whatever it is, whether or not they agree with it. > If you don?t like the way the board decides the issue, you can always vote > for different board members in the next election. > > Owen > > > On Jul 12, 2016, at 13:21 , Evelyn Namara wrote: > > ./All, > > Just out of curiosity, have all former chairpersons served on the CoE with > Badru being the exception? (This is regardless of whether it is automatic > or otherwise) > If the answer is yes - > What criteria does the board use to deem a former chair worthy of a sit on > the CoE? > > > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 11:03 PM, Mike Silber > wrote: > >> Nishal +1 >> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, >> or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to >> be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a >> director. >> >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, >> or a convict. >> >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >> >> > On 12 Jul 2016, at 21:45, Nishal Goburdhan >> wrote: >> > >> >> On 12 Jul 2016, at 13:26, Omo Oaiya wrote: >> >> >> >> Let's get off this micromanagement train. >> > >> > yes indeed, let?s! >> > >> > >> >> "There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a >> >> maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the >> Board. >> >> Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the >> >> organisation as former Chairs." >> > >> > ok, so, let?s break it down, shall we? >> > >> > ?there shall be a council? >> > ?> and indeed, there is one. >> > >> > ?..appointed by the board..? >> > ?> it?s clear to me, that the decision to appoint (or not) is left to >> the board, since, those are the words, verbatim, from the bylaws. >> > >> > ?..comprising a maximum of six former chairpersons..? >> > ?> so, no more than six. >> > >> > t?mam? >> > >> > what?s unclear is probably the following: >> > * there is an _implied assumption_ (the original message in this >> thread) that the appointment is automatic. there is no text to support >> that, so i would call that assumption incorrect. (should there be text to >> this effect is a different question) >> > * there is an _implied assumption_ that *every* ex-chair should be on >> the CoE. there is no text to support that either. >> > * there is an _implied assumption_ that there is a term limit (in >> number of years). it?s true that there is one term limit, but there is no >> > >> > >> >> It goes further in 16.2 to describe how this is managed. >> >> Shall is authoritative. >> > >> > and indeed there is a committee; there?s no debate over that. >> > but ?shall? does not imply ?automatic?, as you?re suggesting below. >> > >> > >> >> Any other interpretation is disingenuous. >> > >> > really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. because an interpretation >> does not match your own, does *not* make that interpretation incorrect. >> > i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, to >> me, seems correct from *my* reading of the text. >> > >> > >> >> In 16.3, the bylaws restricts the tenure of members to one term and >> forbids >> >> re-appointment. If it were not automatic, how is the board expected to >> >> comply? >> > >> > i read this as (and *my* mostly monosyllabical explanation follows) >> > * there is a council >> > * it can have up to six ex-chairs >> > * the council members are appointed by the board >> > * when it gets to six, the first to join the council has to drop off to >> keep this at six >> > >> > i count a current council of 4. which means, to me, that the bylaws >> are respected. >> > i don?t know why badru didn?t make the council. (i might even like to, >> but that?s besides the point). >> > but the decision to appoint or not, seems squarely to be the >> prerogative of the board. and not an automatic process. >> > >> > ?n. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > > > > -- > > > Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: > @enamara | Skype: enamara > > PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rbiramah at ipi9.com Tue Jul 12 23:02:00 2016 From: rbiramah at ipi9.com (Raz BIRAMAH) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:02:00 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] post ipv4 depletion frauds, brokers activities In-Reply-To: References: <803D3537-57FB-4B90-918F-05B8E3149EF0@controlfreak.co.za> <73F0E732-080B-4474-9233-770958C005BA@liquidtelecom.com> Message-ID: <9AD50366-05DE-4625-A140-3DF377215DFF@ipi9.com> > Le 27 juin 2016 ? 11:18, Noah a ?crit : > > NOTE: The idea was for them [Number Resources] to be allocated on needs basis and at some administrative fees and if company 'foo' run out of business and couldn't use them any longer, they were then returned to the parent RIR for re-allocation. +1 Raz -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rbiramah at ipi9.com Tue Jul 12 23:24:14 2016 From: rbiramah at ipi9.com (Raz BIRAMAH) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:24:14 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing In-Reply-To: <82E64662-A369-48DD-BC45-506D6B6DC754@nftconsult.com> References: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <82E64662-A369-48DD-BC45-506D6B6DC754@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: Anyway, i think those documents are not really missed. One just need to upload them to the website and show the link. Isn?t it? Raz > Le 27 juin 2016 ? 15:04, Badru Ntege a ?crit : > > > +1 > > I hope there?s nothing in the mauritian companies act preventing this from happening. > > > > On 6/27/16, 3:51 PM, "Mirriam Namwau" > wrote: > >> >> On 27 Jun 2016 13:50, "Alan Barrett" > wrote: >> > >> > >> > > On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA > wrote: >> > >> > > Dear CEO, >> > > >> > > Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual report. >> > >> > I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I am still learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future. >> > >> Thank you for your frank response and the community hopes that the future will look different. Please note that this is a requirement for the board and "some" board members were there when 2013 report was presented and the organization must have memory. We as a community can't afford to remind those responsible for their duties especially when reports for 2014 and 2015 are not presented or available on line in year 2016. >> Mirriam >> LadiesInTech >> South Sudan >> >> _______________________________________________ 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 Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net Wed Jul 13 05:01:22 2016 From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 06:01:22 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: > Nishal +1 > > Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, > or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to > be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a > director. > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, > or a convict. > No community would. We want them because of their experience as former Chairs I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or be considered. So some might decline or be denied > So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve trust? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Wed Jul 13 05:06:14 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 05:06:14 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [members-discuss] Matters Arising - Further clarification In-Reply-To: <5785443F.2050105@gmail.com> References: <57853BB5.3080308@gmail.com>,<5785443F.2050105@gmail.com> Message-ID: Chair Thanks for your input in the ongoing dialogue. Comments inline > On 12 Jul 2016, at 10:26 pm, Sunday Folayan wrote: > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > > Dear AFRINIC Members and Community, > > I would like to offer some additional clarifications on issues being > discussed. > > 1. Strategic Document > This is not a radical departure from past strategic plans, in outline. > Indeed, this is an enhancement of the unpublished 2014-2018 plan. The > management uses the strategic document to plan activities and to propose > budgets for each year. It should be stated that micro management of the > executives by the Board is not in the best interest of AFRINIC. The community has shared some suggestions in making this process more productive and there is no intention of micromanagement. Please accept community feedback for what it is. We are suggesting that current good practice in setting strategic plans is to make sure that we have some measurable targets. I'm sure some members have also commented on this just in case community feedback might not be carrying the relevant weight. We are only asking that you consider comments made. > > 2. Board-Community Relations > The Board welcomes proposals and solutions on issues at all times. The > board believes that all comments should be made in a manner that is > respectful and gives recognition to the fact that there may be opposing > views. In particular, comments that imply wrongdoing but do not give > details of the alleged infraction are not encouraged or welcomed. There's a thin line between free speech and the opposite. Let's allow members and community to share views and we ask board and chair to express some humility to accept that just as members can be wrong at times board can also be wrong. We need to change the paradigm of "community in attack and board in defence." This can only happen if we respectfully listen to each other. As our chair we expect emails not to be written in defence mode if in doubt ask for clarity. > > 3. Fees. > The recent change in the allocation fee charges was merely a > clarification and it only affects members with new allocation requests; > it has no effect on existing members who do not request additional > number resources. As already indicated, the setting of fees is a Board > responsibility. Any member is welcome to comment on the fee structure > or to make their own proposal at any time, and such comments or > proposals will be duly considered at the time of the next fee review. Noted > > 4. Membership of CoE > The Bylaws section 16 gives the Board the power to consider former > Chairpersons of AFRINIC for appointment to the Council of Elders. The > Board has not formally discussed appointing the former Chairman in > question to the CoE, but we will add a discussion of this issue to the > agenda of the next Board meeting. > Is this a reaction to recent threads. This used to be agenda item for the first meeting of new board. It has taken a year to make it to the agenda, we understand board has been busy. Looking forward to the outcomes of your deliberations. Regards > Thanks and Regards? > > Sunday Folayan > Chair, AFRINIC Board > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net Wed Jul 13 05:12:06 2016 From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 06:12:06 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: On 12 July 2016 at 20:45, Nishal Goburdhan wrote: > > Any other interpretation is disingenuous. >> > > really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. because an interpretation does not match your own, does *not* make that > interpretation incorrect. > i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, to me, > seems correct from *my* reading of the text. sorry but I think what the policy says and intends is pretty obvious -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Wed Jul 13 05:51:24 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 05:51:24 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> , Message-ID: <0DA6BDF2-8520-4C3D-9F20-12DF11C4DC06@nftconsult.com> Hi all I have read all comments on the thread and appreciate the question. We are all volunteers serving the community in one way or the other. As I have always said our diversity is our strengths and I must accept I have very diverse positions most times. I do not believe that we should always conform infact i believe if two people always have the same views one of them is not necessary in the team. You must always be able to share diverse views to get a better outcome. Board conveniently overlooked this issue but let's not look at just this issue. There has always been deeper issue which is the relationship between board and the COE. I think the elephant in the room is the relationship and whether board value the need for COE which is enshrined in the bylaws. COE is purely advisory and board does not need to take COE advise but even this advise seems to be a problem to board. (This is my independent opinion) This to me comes back as an issue with structure and bottom up governance. Which I'm glad as per recent CEO email is being resolved for the next meeting. However let me hope that continued open dialogue will help rebuild the trust that has been eroded. We are all custodians and are expected to hand over AfriNIC to the next generations both Board and community. Regards Badru > From owen at delong.com Wed Jul 13 07:40:37 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 00:40:37 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: > > > > On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber > wrote: > Nishal +1 > > Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. > > No community would. We want them because of their experience as former Chairs > I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or be considered. So some might decline or be denied > > > So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > > This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve trust? Omo, You are claiming facts not in evidence. The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on is nonsensical. Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there is an election. Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision they make. The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net Wed Jul 13 07:57:47 2016 From: Omo.Oaiya at wacren.net (Omo Oaiya) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 08:57:47 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: Owen, Is my claim nonsensical or are you being presumptuous in your assumption that there is no discrimination going on? You can trust that I do not make unsubstantiated claims. Irrespective of board discretion, it is not in spirit of community for such delay with no apology for being casual about it. That we even argue about it is a divisive shame, IMHO The Chair was quick to respond to public discussion and I look forward to the outcome of the meeting. I have no more to say on this matter. -Omo On 13 Jul 2016 8:42 a.m., "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: > > > > On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: > >> Nishal +1 >> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, >> or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to >> be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a >> director. >> > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, >> or a convict. >> > > No community would. We want them because of their experience as former > Chairs > I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or > be considered. So some might decline or be denied > > >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > > > This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are > discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve > trust? > > > Omo, > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered > by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either > direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the > agenda at the next board meeting. > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on > is nonsensical. > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you > don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there > is an election. > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the > board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose > not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a > decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision > they make. > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > 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 evelyngeek at gmail.com Wed Jul 13 08:31:17 2016 From: evelyngeek at gmail.com (Evelyn Namara) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:31:17 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: Owen, Your latest submission is evidence enough that you personally have a problem with Badru being on the CoE and thus are trying to justify for the board why they should or should not appoint him. I get it, this is your personal opinion. I also would like you to respect other people's opinions such as Omo's suggestion that since we don't yet have 6 appointed members to the CoE, leaving Badru out is merely discrimination. All I'm saying is, don't elevate your points and try to minimize other people's inputs. On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: > > > > On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: > >> Nishal +1 >> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, >> or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to >> be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a >> director. >> > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, >> or a convict. >> > > No community would. We want them because of their experience as former > Chairs > I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or > be considered. So some might decline or be denied > > >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > > > This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are > discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve > trust? > > > Omo, > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered > by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either > direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the > agenda at the next board meeting. > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on > is nonsensical. > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you > don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there > is an election. > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the > board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose > not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a > decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision > they make. > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > Owen > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > -- Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From madomey at hotmail.com Wed Jul 13 09:30:33 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 09:30:33 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: , <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za>, , <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za>, , <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za>, <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com>, , , Message-ID: Dear Community, In fact, the purpose of the email of Honest was to smartly draw the attention of the CEO and the Chair of the board of the job they have not done yet. The chair has understood this and has promised to take it to the board for discussion. The delay in considering the appointment of Mr. Ntege to the CoE, whether intentional or not, whether at discretion of board or not, it is showing the dysfunctional characteristic of the board. The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing list some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of the bylaw, which understanding is obvious. Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting which we hope will accord former chairs due respect for sacrifices I hope this time the report of the chair will not display the syndrome of ?sweep under carpet?. Thank you, Marcus From: evelyngeek at gmail.com Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:31:17 +0300 To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders Owen, Your latest submission is evidence enough that you personally have a problem with Badru being on the CoE and thus are trying to justify for the board why they should or should not appoint him. I get it, this is your personal opinion. I also would like you to respect other people's opinions such as Omo's suggestion that since we don't yet have 6 appointed members to the CoE, leaving Badru out is merely discrimination. All I'm saying is, don't elevate your points and try to minimize other people's inputs. On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: Nishal +1 Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. No community would. We want them because of their experience as former Chairs I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or be considered. So some might decline or be denied So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve trust? Omo, You are claiming facts not in evidence. The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on is nonsensical. Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there is an election. Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision they make. The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. Owen _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D _______________________________________________ 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 Jul 13 10:08:34 2016 From: ali at hussein.me.ke (Ali Hussein) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 13:08:34 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: <28410A50-8138-4C85-969A-C2660AC1C57A@hussein.me.ke> Marcus I'd agree with you. The best policy to deal with matters like this would be to dispense with them post-haste. In the spirit of this I think we need to acknowledge the Chair's commitment to address this issue at the earliest. Ali Hussein Principal Hussein & Associates +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim "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 13 Jul 2016, at 12:30 PM, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > Dear Community, > > In fact, the purpose of the email of Honest was to smartly draw the attention of the CEO and the Chair of the board of the job they have not done yet. The chair has understood this and has promised to take it to the board for discussion. > > The delay in considering the appointment of Mr. Ntege to the CoE, whether intentional or not, whether at discretion of board or not, it is showing the dysfunctional characteristic of the board. The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing list some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of the bylaw, which understanding is obvious. > > Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting which we hope will accord former chairs due respect for sacrifices > > I hope this time the report of the chair will not display the syndrome of ?sweep under carpet?. > > Thank you, > > > Marcus > > > > > From: evelyngeek at gmail.com > Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:31:17 +0300 > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > > Owen, > > > Your latest submission is evidence enough that you personally have a problem with Badru being on the CoE and thus are trying to justify for the board why they should or should not appoint him. I get it, this is your personal opinion. I also would like you to respect other people's opinions such as Omo's suggestion that since we don't yet have 6 appointed members to the CoE, leaving Badru out is merely discrimination. > > All I'm saying is, don't elevate your points and try to minimize other people's inputs. > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: > > > > On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: > Nishal +1 > > Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. > I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. > > No community would. We want them because of their experience as former Chairs > I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or be considered. So some might decline or be denied > > > So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > > This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve trust? > > Omo, > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on is nonsensical. > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there is an election. > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision they make. > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > Owen > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > > -- > > > Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara > > PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ 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 nishal at controlfreak.co.za Wed Jul 13 10:23:57 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:23:57 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: <200753C5-9912-42FE-9C72-D725E348CC5D@controlfreak.co.za> On 13 Jul 2016, at 7:12, Omo Oaiya wrote: > On 12 July 2016 at 20:45, Nishal Goburdhan > wrote: > really omo? that?s hardly sporting of you. > because an interpretation does not match your own, does *not* make > that > interpretation incorrect. > i?m simply giving you (this public list) my interpretation. which, > to me, > seems correct from *my* reading of the text. > >> sorry but I think what the policy says and intends is pretty obvious as i said, i suspect the problem is in the implied intention. which is not what the actual text says, even though it may be what the intention might have been. i don?t think that to be an insurmountable problem to fix.. ?n. From nishal at controlfreak.co.za Wed Jul 13 10:24:49 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:24:49 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: <436AD56E-CA56-4B56-8578-B87099ADD4DA@controlfreak.co.za> On 13 Jul 2016, at 11:30, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > The delay in considering the appointment of Mr. Ntege to the CoE, > whether intentional or not, whether at discretion of board or not, it > is showing the dysfunctional characteristic of the board. i respectfully disagree. if it?s ?at discretion? as opposed to ?automatic? - which, btw, was a key point in the original message - then there is no ?dysfunction? as you allude to. i agree with you that this is probably something that the Board *should* have discussed sooner; but *not* discussing a *discretionary* item is hardly dysfunctional. i run several working groups, that often have ?optional? items that stay on the agenda for more than a year, *because they are optional*, and by their definition, do not get precedence over more pressing matters, in the limited time that the group meets to discuss matters. so, call a spade, a spade, eh? > The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not > build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing > list some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of > the bylaw, which understanding is obvious. again, you imply one thing, when the truth is another. there is rarely ?obvious? understanding, and this discussion should have proven that. * there is that, which the text (bylaws) says, and needs to be read literally * there is clearly disagreement on what this written text means to some * there is scope for improvement of the text or, perhaps not? perhaps it?s literal enough to mean, exactly what it says? as a step moving forward, it would be useful, if, those that think that this text needs to be changed, submit new text (like some of the really good proposals that this list has already seen!). > Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting yes indeed, and let us respect, and support the outcome of this decision. meanwhile, the challenge for new (better) text, still stands. ?n. From nishal at controlfreak.co.za Wed Jul 13 10:28:03 2016 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:28:03 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5EE495E9-B054-41CC-90D2-9EFFA91C7936@controlfreak.co.za> On 12 Jul 2016, at 23:38, John Ngwoke wrote: > Since the chair Sunday has assured us that this matter > will be treated by the board in their next meeting. We have confidence in > the board members, that is why we voted them. So we have to trust them on > this, knowing that what ever decision they will arrive at will be in the > interest of AFRINIC. quod erat demonstrandum. thank you, Chair. (and congratulations!) ?n. From mje at posix.co.za Wed Jul 13 10:42:13 2016 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:42:13 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Appointment oc Chair and Vice Chair In-Reply-To: References: <0E5ED341-94F4-476B-AC09-6777A73099EA@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <57861B05.50401@posix.co.za> Congratulations to Sunday an Haitham on their re-appointments as Chair and Vice-Chair. I believe that this continuation of responsibility is good for the stability of the AFRINIC Board and by extension good for AFRINIC, the AFRINIC membership and broader AFRINIC community. On 12/07/2016 17:43, Alan Barrett wrote: > During a Board meeting on 6 July 2016, the AFRINIC Board reappointed > Sunday Folayan as Chairperson, and Haitham el-Nakhal as > Vice-Chairperson, for one year terms. -- 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/pkcs7-signature Size: 4230 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng Wed Jul 13 10:50:58 2016 From: akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng (Timothy Ola Akinfenwa) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:50:58 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <28410A50-8138-4C85-969A-C2660AC1C57A@hussein.me.ke> Message-ID: I've had to watch proceedings on this thread following Honest's honest enquiry at the CEO/Chair. For me I'm sure it was just an objective observation which also ask some more questions begging for answers. Firstly, how many past full term Board Chair are currently in the CoE? How were they nominated or appointed to the CoE? Was it an oversight 1 year after Mr. Ntege has completed his tenure that he was not considered even if he was qualified or not? Was the current Board waiting for Mr. Ntege to appoint or nominate himself? Glad that the Chair has graciously added it to the next agenda, but was it because the issue was raised here? I've read Mr. Ntege earlier submission on this which suggests that things didn't follow the normal cause. This should be corrected to avoid similar situations in the future. While I don't doubt the capability of the current Board to take AFRINIC to the next enviable level, but more should be done to continually uphold and justify the trust the community has in you all. Remember that once the trust is gone, crisis will follow! For me, we don't need to settle any personal or political scores on this platform. The diverse opinions of the community members should not always throw us off guard, rather it should propel us to achieve a better AFRINIC. For new members of the community like me, I don't think it's nice when we see derogatory comments on each other from the elders. IMHO sirs and ma, everyone should strive to drive home their points constructively and objectively without personal confrontation. AFRINIC is bigger than us all! I wish to submit here for now. Thanks Timothy On 13 Jul 2016 11:10 a.m., "Ali Hussein" wrote: Marcus I'd agree with you. The best policy to deal with matters like this would be to dispense with them post-haste. In the spirit of this I think we need to acknowledge the Chair's commitment to address this issue at the earliest. *Ali Hussein* *Principal* *Hussein & Associates* +254 0713 601113 / 0770906375 Twitter: @AliHKassim Skype: abu-jomo LinkedIn: http://ke.linkedin.com/in/alihkassim "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 13 Jul 2016, at 12:30 PM, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: Dear Community, In fact, the purpose of the email of Honest was to smartly draw the attention of the CEO and the Chair of the board of the job they have not done yet. The chair has understood this and has promised to take it to the board for discussion. The delay in considering the appointment of Mr. Ntege to the CoE, whether intentional or not, whether at discretion of board or not, it is showing the dysfunctional characteristic of the board. The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing list some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of the bylaw, which understanding is obvious. Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting which we hope will accord former chairs due respect for sacrifices I hope this time the report of the chair will not display the syndrome of ?sweep under carpet?. Thank you, Marcus ------------------------------ From: evelyngeek at gmail.com Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:31:17 +0300 To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders Owen, Your latest submission is evidence enough that you personally have a problem with Badru being on the CoE and thus are trying to justify for the board why they should or should not appoint him. I get it, this is your personal opinion. I also would like you to respect other people's opinions such as Omo's suggestion that since we don't yet have 6 appointed members to the CoE, leaving Badru out is merely discrimination. All I'm saying is, don't elevate your points and try to minimize other people's inputs. On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: Nishal +1 Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. No community would. We want them because of their experience as former Chairs I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or be considered. So some might decline or be denied So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve trust? Omo, You are claiming facts not in evidence. The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on is nonsensical. Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there is an election. Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision they make. The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. Owen _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -- Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D _______________________________________________ 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 Wed Jul 13 11:53:38 2016 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:53:38 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <436AD56E-CA56-4B56-8578-B87099ADD4DA@controlfreak.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <436AD56E-CA56-4B56-8578-B87099ADD4DA@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: we can't solve everything in constitution. We will need Implementation guidelines, policies etc... and if there is still residual confusion, consensus approach shall prevail Regards Le 13 juil. 2016 10:25, "Nishal Goburdhan" a ?crit : > > On 13 Jul 2016, at 11:30, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > > > >> The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing list some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of the bylaw, which understanding is obvious. > > > again, you imply one thing, when the truth is another. there is rarely ?obvious? understanding, and this discussion should have proven that. > * there is that, which the text (bylaws) says, and needs to be read literally > * there is clearly disagreement on what this written text means to some > * there is scope for improvement of the text > > or, perhaps not? perhaps it?s literal enough to mean, exactly what it says? as a step moving forward, it would be useful, if, those that think that this text needs to be changed, submit new text (like some of the really good proposals that this list has already seen!). > > > >> Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting > > > yes indeed, and let us respect, and support the outcome of this decision. > > meanwhile, the challenge for new (better) text, still stands. > > ?n. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jul 13 15:04:24 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 08:04:24 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: <3A635917-6660-4EE0-8F7C-7823D4B1B859@delong.com> I have no problem with Badeue being on the council of elders if the board chooses to do so. However, I do believe that there are perfectly valid reasons that they may choose not to. At the end of the day, I recognize that it is entirely up to the board and at their discretion. The bylaws do not require them to act on this at all or in a timely way. Their decision or lack there of is entirely at their discretion. Calling such a decision discrimination is no more rational than claiming that limiting RPD to those with email addresses is discrimination. Owen > On Jul 13, 2016, at 01:31, Evelyn Namara wrote: > > Owen, > > > Your latest submission is evidence enough that you personally have a problem with Badru being on the CoE and thus are trying to justify for the board why they should or should not appoint him. I get it, this is your personal opinion. I also would like you to respect other people's opinions such as Omo's suggestion that since we don't yet have 6 appointed members to the CoE, leaving Badru out is merely discrimination. > > All I'm saying is, don't elevate your points and try to minimize other people's inputs. > > >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:40 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber wrote: >>>> Nishal +1 >>>> >>>> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that would disqualify them as a director. >>>> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE member, or a convict. >>> >>> No community would. We want them because of their experience as former Chairs >>> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >>> >>>> >>>> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >>> >>> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this improve trust? >> >> Omo, >> >> You are claiming facts not in evidence. >> >> The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. >> >> Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on is nonsensical. >> >> Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next time there is an election. >> >> Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever decision they make. >> >> The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. >> >> Owen >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community-Discuss mailing list >> Community-Discuss at afrinic.net >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > -- > > > Evelyn Namara | T: +256 754 440893 | E: enamara at riseup.net | Twitter: @enamara | Skype: enamara > > PGP: B94D 3950 38D6 914A E054 D6C5 E82E 0F66 DC01 E30D > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 mje at posix.co.za Wed Jul 13 16:54:43 2016 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 18:54:43 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> Message-ID: <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea that there was bad blood between various parties. I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as such, CoE). Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on the CoE. On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya > > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber > > wrote: >> >> Nishal +1 >> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were >> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even >> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that >> would disqualify them as a director. >> >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE >> member, or a convict. >> >> >> No community would. We want them because of their experience as >> former Chairs >> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider >> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >> >> >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >> >> >> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are >> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this >> improve trust? > > Omo, > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been > considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of > action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that > it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on > is nonsensical. > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If > you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next > time there is an election. > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from > the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they > choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this > is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever > decision they make. > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > Owen > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/pkcs7-signature Size: 4230 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From afabbie at hotmail.com Wed Jul 13 17:05:58 2016 From: afabbie at hotmail.com (Fabian Jr) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:05:58 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> , <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> Message-ID: I second Mark's remarks... I was following Tunisia meeting online I was not there physically it was a shame.... It's very unfortunate.. Badru is from my region EA... I'm sorry I would not recommend him to the elders group at least for now Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. Original Message From: Mark Elkins Sent: Wednesday, 13 July 2016 19:58 To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Reply To: mje at posix.co.za Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea that there was bad blood between various parties. I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as such, CoE). Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on the CoE. On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya > > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber > > wrote: >> >> Nishal +1 >> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were >> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even >> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that >> would disqualify them as a director. >> >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE >> member, or a convict. >> >> >> No community would. We want them because of their experience as >> former Chairs >> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider >> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >> >> >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >> >> >> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are >> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this >> improve trust? > > Omo, > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been > considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of > action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that > it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on > is nonsensical. > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If > you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next > time there is an election. > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from > the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they > choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this > is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever > decision they make. > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > Owen > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng Wed Jul 13 17:11:53 2016 From: akin.akinfenwa at uniosun.edu.ng (Timothy Ola Akinfenwa) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 18:11:53 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> Message-ID: +1 Mark. This clarification was indeed necessary. ? On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Mark Elkins wrote: > Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. > > Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the > Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. > I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. > > There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you > were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea > that there was bad blood between various parties. > > I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to > having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as > such, CoE). > > Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and > hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying > to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would > not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on > the CoE. > > On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya >> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber >> > wrote: > >> > >> Nishal +1 > >> > >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were > >> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even > >> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that > >> would disqualify them as a director. > >> > >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE > >> member, or a convict. > >> > >> > >> No community would. We want them because of their experience as > >> former Chairs > >> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider > >> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied > >> > >> > >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > >> > >> > >> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are > >> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this > >> improve trust? > > > > Omo, > > > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been > > considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of > > action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that > > it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. > > > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on > > is nonsensical. > > > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They > > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and > > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If > > you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next > > time there is an election. > > > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the > > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from > > the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they > > choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this > > is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever > > decision they make. > > > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to > > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > > > Owen > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 madomey at hotmail.com Wed Jul 13 18:03:59 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 18:03:59 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <436AD56E-CA56-4B56-8578-B87099ADD4DA@controlfreak.co.za> References: , <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za>, , <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za>, , <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za>, <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com>, , , , , <436AD56E-CA56-4B56-8578-B87099ADD4DA@controlfreak.co.za> Message-ID: Hi Nishal, I did not use "at discretion" but rather "whether at discretion of board or not". If you have only seen "at discretion" there is no way you will understand my entire message. Go back to the email with "whether at discretion of board or not" to get the full meaning of my message. Enjoy the reading!!! Marcus > From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:24:49 +0200 > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > > On 13 Jul 2016, at 11:30, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > > The delay in considering the appointment of Mr. Ntege to the CoE, > > whether intentional or not, whether at discretion of board or not, it > > is showing the dysfunctional characteristic of the board. > > i respectfully disagree. if it?s ?at discretion? as opposed to > ?automatic? - which, btw, was a key point in the original message - > then there is no ?dysfunction? as you allude to. > > i agree with you that this is probably something that the Board *should* > have discussed sooner; but *not* discussing a *discretionary* item is > hardly dysfunctional. i run several working groups, that often have > ?optional? items that stay on the agenda for more than a year, > *because they are optional*, and by their definition, do not get > precedence over more pressing matters, in the limited time that the > group meets to discuss matters. > > so, call a spade, a spade, eh? > > > > The consequence of this delay of a year is in bad taste which does not > > build trust. Moreover, this delay has also generated on this mailing > > list some unpleasant acrobatic interpretations of the section 16.1 of > > the bylaw, which understanding is obvious. > > again, you imply one thing, when the truth is another. there is rarely > ?obvious? understanding, and this discussion should have proven > that. > * there is that, which the text (bylaws) says, and needs to be read > literally > * there is clearly disagreement on what this written text means to some > * there is scope for improvement of the text > > or, perhaps not? perhaps it?s literal enough to mean, exactly what it > says? as a step moving forward, it would be useful, if, those that > think that this text needs to be changed, submit new text (like some of > the really good proposals that this list has already seen!). > > > > Let us wait for the outcome of the board meeting > > yes indeed, and let us respect, and support the outcome of this > decision. > > meanwhile, the challenge for new (better) text, still stands. > > ?n. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jul 13 19:03:42 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:03:42 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> , <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> Message-ID: <1896CC76-91BD-4935-BFD8-C17A32C4286B@nftconsult.com> Mr Elkins You would like to drag the community back that's your point. You know very well my position. You can also choose to go personal. I'm way above that level of petty thinking. I'm curious that a particular grouping has taken it to themselves to justify and defend the actions of the board yet Chair sent the board position this morning. The events of tunis and Mauritius are very clear and as far as the Afrinic board goes to me represented the darkest hours in the history of the board. My resignation was due to the fact that the board choose to misrepresent the facts of the Mauritius meeting by eliminating large portions. Because we get away with a lie does not make remove the fact that it is a lie. As mentioned earlier I have no problems standing alone as long as I beleive I'm right which is what I did. Time tells allot. As it has proved with all the empty accusations on finance it will tell with the rest. My ethics have no price. I have no regrets for my actions > On 13 Jul 2016, at 7:55 pm, Mark Elkins wrote: > > Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. > > Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the > Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. > I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. > > There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you > were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea > that there was bad blood between various parties. > > I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to > having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as > such, CoE). > > Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and > hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying > to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would > not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on > the CoE. > >> On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber >> > wrote: >>> >>> Nishal +1 >>> >>> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were >>> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even >>> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that >>> would disqualify them as a director. >>> >>> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE >>> member, or a convict. >>> >>> >>> No community would. We want them because of their experience as >>> former Chairs >>> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider >>> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >>> >>> >>> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >>> >>> >>> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are >>> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this >>> improve trust? >> >> Omo, >> >> You are claiming facts not in evidence. >> >> The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been >> considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of >> action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that >> it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. >> >> Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on >> is nonsensical. >> >> Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They >> are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and >> nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If >> you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next >> time there is an election. >> >> Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the >> chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from >> the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they >> choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this >> is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever >> decision they make. >> >> The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to >> choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. >> >> Owen >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Wed Jul 13 19:20:16 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:20:16 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> , <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za>, Message-ID: Fabian It's unfortunate that you are not privy to all the facts which are shielded behind non-disclosure. My actions for the sake of the organisation I cannot share the depth and detail so the likes of Elkins can frame what they choose to frame. Please trace back the origins of my resignation and history of events in Mauritius which chair has deliberately sealed but also offered a heavily edited version in Tunis. The character attack that Elkins and others are starting on this thread is characteristic of someone with a weak argument if all fails attack the individual. Badru Ntege CEO NFT Consult Ltd Www.Nftconsult.com ?Vision without execution is hallucination.? ? Thomas A. Edison > On 13 Jul 2016, at 8:06 pm, Fabian Jr wrote: > > I second Mark's remarks... > > I was following Tunisia meeting online I was not there physically it was a shame.... > > It's very unfortunate.. Badru is from my region EA... > > I'm sorry I would not recommend him to the elders group at least for now > > Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone. > Original Message > From: Mark Elkins > Sent: Wednesday, 13 July 2016 19:58 > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > Reply To: mje at posix.co.za > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > > > Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. > > Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the > Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. > I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. > > There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you > were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea > that there was bad blood between various parties. > > I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to > having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as > such, CoE). > > Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and > hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying > to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would > not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on > the CoE. > >> On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: >> >>> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya >> > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber >> > wrote: >>> >>> Nishal +1 >>> >>> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were >>> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even >>> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that >>> would disqualify them as a director. >>> >>> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE >>> member, or a convict. >>> >>> >>> No community would. We want them because of their experience as >>> former Chairs >>> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider >>> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >>> >>> >>> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >>> >>> >>> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are >>> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this >>> improve trust? >> >> Omo, >> >> You are claiming facts not in evidence. >> >> The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been >> considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of >> action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that >> it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. >> >> Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on >> is nonsensical. >> >> Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They >> are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and >> nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If >> you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next >> time there is an election. >> >> Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the >> chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from >> the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they >> choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this >> is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever >> decision they make. >> >> The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to >> choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. >> >> Owen >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 From owen at delong.com Wed Jul 13 19:43:27 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:43:27 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> Message-ID: <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. I wasn?t on the board, but I was present at the Tunis meeting. Owen > On Jul 13, 2016, at 10:11 , Timothy Ola Akinfenwa wrote: > > +1 Mark. This clarification was indeed necessary. ? > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Mark Elkins > wrote: > Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. > > Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the > Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. > I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. > > There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you > were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea > that there was bad blood between various parties. > > I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to > having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as > such, CoE). > > Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and > hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying > to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would > not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on > the CoE. > > On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: > > > >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya > >> >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber > >> >> wrote: > >> > >> Nishal +1 > >> > >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were > >> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even > >> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that > >> would disqualify them as a director. > >> > >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE > >> member, or a convict. > >> > >> > >> No community would. We want them because of their experience as > >> former Chairs > >> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider > >> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied > >> > >> > >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. > >> > >> > >> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are > >> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this > >> improve trust? > > > > Omo, > > > > You are claiming facts not in evidence. > > > > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been > > considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of > > action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that > > it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. > > > > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on > > is nonsensical. > > > > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They > > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and > > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If > > you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next > > time there is an election. > > > > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the > > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from > > the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they > > choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this > > is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever > > decision they make. > > > > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to > > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. > > > > Owen > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Wed Jul 13 20:26:44 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:26:44 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > > Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen. You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective reasons behind this entire thread. I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He has continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless charactee assassination unleashed unto him. What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. - Disregard of the bylaws. - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. - Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the community like 1 year ago... never bothered too. - The board never even considered what the community would think whether they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts. -This level of disregard is uncalled for. - The current status quo is really unfortunate. Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amelnaud at gmail.com Wed Jul 13 20:49:38 2016 From: amelnaud at gmail.com (Arnaud AMELINA) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 20:49:38 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: +1 to Noah, well says guy. Regards Le 13 juil. 2016 20:27, "Noah" a ?crit : > > On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that > I > > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > > > > > > Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen. > > You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective reasons > behind this entire thread. > > I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He has > continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless > charactee assassination unleashed unto him. > > What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of > the board and the board chair a number of concerns. > > - Disregard of the bylaws. > > - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. > > - Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the > very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the > community like 1 year ago... never bothered too. > > - The board never even considered what the community would think whether > they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some > have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts. > > -This level of disregard is uncalled for. > > - The current status quo is really unfortunate. > > Noah > > _______________________________________________ > 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 john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng Wed Jul 13 21:48:14 2016 From: john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng (John Ngwoke) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 22:48:14 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: I believe we all are learned people. I wonder while we are still discussing this issue even after the assurance of the Chair that the board will treat this during their next meeting. Please let's leave this discussion and look forward to the outcome of the next board meeting. On 13 Jul 2016 21:50, "Arnaud AMELINA" wrote: > +1 to Noah, well says guy. > > Regards > Le 13 juil. 2016 20:27, "Noah" a ?crit : > >> >> On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" wrote: >> > >> > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said >> that I >> > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. >> > >> > >> >> Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen. >> >> You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective reasons >> behind this entire thread. >> >> I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He has >> continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless >> charactee assassination unleashed unto him. >> >> What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of >> the board and the board chair a number of concerns. >> >> - Disregard of the bylaws. >> >> - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. >> >> - Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the >> very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the >> community like 1 year ago... never bothered too. >> >> - The board never even considered what the community would think whether >> they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some >> have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts. >> >> -This level of disregard is uncalled for. >> >> - The current status quo is really unfortunate. >> >> Noah >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 honest1989 at gmail.com Wed Jul 13 22:58:12 2016 From: honest1989 at gmail.com (Honest Ornella GANKPA) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:58:12 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: Dear John, The discussion continues because a simple inquiry on a selection process is deemed "micromanagement" and gets (some) people on the defensive. An issue was brought up to the board's attention but now the thread was derailed into questionning the character of Mr Ntege. If people can give their opinions, he has a right to defend himself. Just because I voted for a board based on trust doesn't mean I cannot question their processes and methods. This is one (of many) occasion the board has to demonstrate it is commited to give more accountability and transparency to our community. Honest Ornella GANKPA 2016-07-13 22:48 GMT+01:00 John Ngwoke : > I believe we all are learned people. I wonder while we are still > discussing this issue even after the assurance of the Chair that the board > will treat this during their next meeting. > Please let's leave this discussion and look forward to the outcome of the > next board meeting. > On 13 Jul 2016 21:50, "Arnaud AMELINA" wrote: > >> +1 to Noah, well says guy. >> >> Regards >> Le 13 juil. 2016 20:27, "Noah" a ?crit : >> >>> >>> On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" wrote: >>> > >>> > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said >>> that I >>> > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. >>> > >>> > >>> >>> Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen. >>> >>> You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective >>> reasons behind this entire thread. >>> >>> I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He >>> has continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless >>> charactee assassination unleashed unto him. >>> >>> What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension >>> of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. >>> >>> - Disregard of the bylaws. >>> >>> - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. >>> >>> - Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the >>> very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the >>> community like 1 year ago... never bothered too. >>> >>> - The board never even considered what the community would think whether >>> they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some >>> have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts. >>> >>> -This level of disregard is uncalled for. >>> >>> - The current status quo is really unfortunate. >>> >>> Noah >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 madomey at hotmail.com Wed Jul 13 23:16:58 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:16:58 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: , <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za>, , <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za>, , <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za>, <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com>, , , <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za>, , <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com>, , , Message-ID: Hi John, I also believe that we are learned people but not all of us have the common sense to keep quite when the chair gave the assurance that the board would treat the issue at the next board meeting. Let us assume that it is reasonable to do so. Wisdom suggests that when you have nothing constructive to say, keep quite. It is unfortunate that Mr. Mark Elkins does not know about this basic wisdom. Instead of stating what led to Mr. Badru Ntege's resignation and conclude it with the moral aspect of the resignation, Mr. Mark Elkins has limited his comments just on the moral aspect resignation. This is misleading and mischievous. Who does not know the machination that went on in Mauritius and Tunis? And the naive spirits are supporting him. John, take it easy and let us wait for the board's report. Cheers!!! Marcus Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 22:48:14 +0100 From: john.ngwoke at unn.edu.ng To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders I believe we all are learned people. I wonder while we are still discussing this issue even after the assurance of the Chair that the board will treat this during their next meeting. Please let's leave this discussion and look forward to the outcome of the next board meeting. On 13 Jul 2016 21:50, "Arnaud AMELINA" wrote: +1 to Noah, well says guy. Regards Le 13 juil. 2016 20:27, "Noah" a ?crit : On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > > Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen. You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective reasons behind this entire thread. I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He has continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless charactee assassination unleashed unto him. What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. - Disregard of the bylaws. - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. - Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the community like 1 year ago... never bothered too. - The board never even considered what the community would think whether they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts. -This level of disregard is uncalled for. - The current status quo is really unfortunate. Noah _______________________________________________ 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 Thu Jul 14 02:57:56 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:57:56 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 13, 2016, at 13:26 , Noah wrote: > > > On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > > > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I > > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > > > > > > Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen. > > You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective reasons behind this entire thread. > > I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He has continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless charactee assassination unleashed unto him. > > What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. > > - Disregard of the bylaws. > There was no disregard of the bylaws? Objectively this is true and your continued subjective claims that it occurred are specious and seem intended to foment distrust of the board. > - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. > Please enumerate these issues. Objectively, we cannot evaluate what you are talking about if you won?t specify it. > - Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the community like 1 year ago... never bothered too. > Huh? I don?t understand your statement here. Objectively: 1. The board has no obligation to discuss the CoE issue at all. 2. The board has no required timeframe in which to discuss said issue. 3. Appointment to the CoE is entirely at the discretion of the board. 4. Objectively, that is what the bylaws say. Calling our objective statements subjective because you think that somehow makes it less credible is disingenuous at best. > - The board never even considered what the community would think whether they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts. > What, exactly, is it you think that the bylaws clearly say? I posted the bylaws themselves (the entire section 16 which covers CoE) in my first post on this subject. I made no attempt to hide, obfuscate, or otherwise confuse the issue. I stated objectively the clear plain english meaning of the text as written. I agree that the text could be better written. Someone else posted a challenge that I should provide suggested replacement text, so I will do that now. For reference, again, here is the current Section 16: 16 THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organisation as former Chairs. 16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity. 16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number of members of the council does not exceed six (6). 16.3 On the completion of their tenure of office, members of this Council shall retire and not be eligible for re-appointment. 16.4 This Council shall have an advisory role and shall provide help and assistance to the Chair or the entire Board. Now, here is my proposed rewrite. My text still carries the exact same meaning as the above text, but I believe provides greater clarity and reduces ambiguity. 16 THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who are no longer members of the board. Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organization as former Chairs. 16.1 Membership in the Council shall be comprised of former chairpersons who served at least one full one-year term (the Chair is elected every year by the Board) as chair and who are then appointed by resolution and at the discretion of the current board. 16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number of members of the council does not exceed six (6). 16.3 Once a members time on the council ends, they shall retire and shall not be eligible for re-appointment to the council. 16.4 The role of this Council is as an advisory body to the board and their service is at the pleasure of the Chair and other members of the board. > -This level of disregard is uncalled for. > I am not sure what you mean by disregard. I do not see any disregard. Then I don?t see any of the other things you seem so thoroughly upset about, either, but since you refuse to provide any objective documentation of same at least so far, it is difficult to know if this is just poor observation on my part, or, some other issue on your side. > - The current status quo is really unfortunate. > In what way? It seems to me that the board is doing what needs to be done and focusing on the true priorities. It seems to me that they have managed to remain responsive to community requests while remaining focused and continuing to make meaningful progress on the most pressing needs of the organization. I will admit that that last part is subjective, but do you have any objective measure by which my statement is false? If you have a subjective contrary opinion, that?s fine too, but in that case, it?s simply that we both disagree which is entirely possible among men of good conscience without it meaning that either of them has any form of ill will or lapse in judgment. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Thu Jul 14 06:02:21 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 10:02:21 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> > On 14 Jul 2016, at 00:26, Noah wrote: > > What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. > > - Disregard of the bylaws. Please state which bylaws have been disregarded, and how. > - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. Please state which issues have been swept under the carpet, and how. Alan Barrett From madomey at hotmail.com Thu Jul 14 06:08:51 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 06:08:51 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: , <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za>, , <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za>, , <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za>, <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com>, , , <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za>, , <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com>, , Message-ID: Dear Mr. Owen Delong, What an impossible intellectual gymnastic to objectivise your subjectivity!!!! Marcus From: owen at delong.com Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:57:56 -0700 To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders On Jul 13, 2016, at 13:26 , Noah wrote: On 13 Jul 2016 22:46, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > >Ya'all need to stop being subjective... Elkins, Owen.You are all so subjective that you even missed the very objective reasons behind this entire thread.I dont think Badru himself cares if he is on that CoE list or not. He has continued to contribute to this community objectively less the endless charactee assassination unleashed unto him.What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns.- Disregard of the bylaws.There was no disregard of the bylaws? Objectively this is true and your continued subjective claims that it occurred are specious and seem intended to foment distrust of the board. - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues.Please enumerate these issues. Objectively, we cannot evaluate what you are talking about if you won?t specify it.- Subjective discremination and this is a fact. Its a fact because the very board which was supposed to discuss the CoE issue and inform the community like 1 year ago... never bothered too.Huh? I don?t understand your statement here. Objectively: 1. The board has no obligation to discuss the CoE issue at all. 2. The board has no required timeframe in which to discuss said issue. 3. Appointment to the CoE is entirely at the discretion of the board. 4. Objectively, that is what the bylaws say. Calling our objective statements subjective because you think that somehow makes it less credible is disingenuous at best. - The board never even considered what the community would think whether they appointed badru or not yet the bylawys are clear on this though some have tirelessly worked hard to try interprete texts.What, exactly, is it you think that the bylaws clearly say? I posted the bylaws themselves (the entire section 16 which covers CoE) in my first post on this subject. I made no attempt to hide, obfuscate, or otherwise confuse the issue. I stated objectively the clear plain english meaning of the text as written. I agree that the text could be better written. Someone else posted a challenge that I should provide suggested replacement text, so I will do that now. For reference, again, here is the current Section 16: 16 THE COUNCIL OF ELDERSThere shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who have left the Board. Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organisation as former Chairs.16.1 Membership to the Council shall be opened to such former chairpersons who served at least one full term in that capacity.16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number of members of the council does not exceed six (6).16.3 On the completion of their tenure of office, members of this Council shall retire and not be eligible for re-appointment.16.4 This Council shall have an advisory role and shall provide help and assistance to the Chair or the entire Board. Now, here is my proposed rewrite. My text still carries the exact same meaning as the above text, but I believe provides greater clarity and reduces ambiguity. 16 THE COUNCIL OF ELDERS There shall be a Council of Elders appointed by the Board comprising a maximum of six (6) former chairpersons of AFRINIC who are no longer members of the board. Their advisory role is commensurate with their experience leading the organization as former Chairs.16.1 Membership in the Council shall be comprised of former chairpersons who served at least one full one-year term (the Chair is elected every year by the Board) as chair and who are then appointed by resolution and at the discretion of the current board.16.2 First in first out principle will be used to ensure that the number of members of the council does not exceed six (6).16.3 Once a members time on the council ends, they shall retire and shall not be eligible for re-appointment to the council.16.4 The role of this Council is as an advisory body to the board and their service is at the pleasure of the Chair and other members of the board.-This level of disregard is uncalled for.I am not sure what you mean by disregard. I do not see any disregard. Then I don?t see any of the other things you seem so thoroughly upset about, either, but since you refuse to provide any objective documentation of same at least so far, it is difficult to know if this is just poor observation on my part, or, some other issue on your side. - The current status quo is really unfortunate. In what way? It seems to me that the board is doing what needs to be done and focusing on the true priorities. It seems to me that they have managed to remain responsive to community requests while remaining focused and continuing to make meaningful progress on the most pressing needs of the organization. I will admit that that last part is subjective, but do you have any objective measure by which my statement is false? If you have a subjective contrary opinion, that?s fine too, but in that case, it?s simply that we both disagree which is entirely possible among men of good conscience without it meaning that either of them has any form of ill will or lapse in 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 alan.barrett at afrinic.net Thu Jul 14 06:23:11 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 10:23:11 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Politeness and respect Message-ID: Please could all participants in this mailing list treat each other with politeness and respect. Alan Barrett CEO, AFRINIC From noah at neo.co.tz Thu Jul 14 06:32:42 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:32:42 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On 14 Jul 2016 09:04, "Alan Barrett" wrote: > > > > On 14 Jul 2016, at 00:26, Noah wrote: > > > > What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. > > > > - Disregard of the bylaws. > > Please state which bylaws have been disregarded, and how. > The chair has promised to respond to this effect. It took one year but he has promised to discuss the issue in the BoD next meeting and give us feedback. > > - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. > > Please state which issues have been swept under the carpet, and how. > > Its all in the mailing list achieves. Some questions that have been asked and never answered in a satisfactory manner. > Alan Barrett > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 07:01:04 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 00:01:04 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Politeness and respect In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <858027DD-301C-457C-9CFE-A3EB2099750B@delong.com> I apologize if I have somehow failed to do so. I?ve been trying. If you feel that I did fail, please let me know the specifics so that I know what to change. Thanks, Owen > On Jul 13, 2016, at 23:23 , Alan Barrett wrote: > > Please could all participants in this mailing list treat each other with politeness and respect. > > Alan Barrett > CEO, AFRINIC > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 07:06:48 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 00:06:48 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> Message-ID: > On Jul 13, 2016, at 23:32 , Noah wrote: > > > On 14 Jul 2016 09:04, "Alan Barrett" > wrote: > > > > > > > On 14 Jul 2016, at 00:26, Noah > wrote: > > > > > > What this thread has actually been about was to bring to the attension of the board and the board chair a number of concerns. > > > > > > - Disregard of the bylaws. > > > > Please state which bylaws have been disregarded, and how. > > > > The chair has promised to respond to this effect. It took one year but he has promised to discuss the issue in the BoD next meeting and give us feedback. > The chair has promised that the board will take up the matter of whether or not to put Badru on the CoE. As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, they are not required to do so by the bylaws. It is entirely at the discretion of the board. Q.E.D. There is no disregard of the bylaws even in the year you are complaining about. Do you have some other example, or is this your entire case? > > > - Sweeping under the carpet of certain issues. > > > > Please state which issues have been swept under the carpet, and how. > > > > > > Its all in the mailing list achieves. Some questions that have been asked and never answered in a satisfactory manner. > Unless you can provide specific references, this is the same kind of vague accusation without substance as your previous statement. This is not subjectivity, this is a request that you back up your supposedly objective claims with actual facts. If you cannot substantiate your accusations with something other than vague references to large libraries of text without citing specifics, then it is most difficult, nay, impossible to address your concerns in a meaningful way. Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Thu Jul 14 07:20:29 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 10:20:29 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On 14 Jul 2016 10:16, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? > Refer to all the reminders you will see from on the mailing lists.. > Owen > > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Thu Jul 14 07:27:25 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 10:27:25 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: On 28 Jun 2016 19:14, "Keshwarsingh Nadan" wrote: > > Dear Chair, > > > > 1. The Board has always been responsible for setting the fees. ?Review? includes the right to change the fees. > > > > Agree on this one. > > I certainly ackowledge the same with a reservation that resource members views on the same are significant. > > 2. The problem being addressed is that every allocation or assignment event requires effort from staff, and it is not fair for that effort to sometimes be undertaken free of charge. > > > > The staff has always been and is presently remunerated for that effort, so how come that remunerated effort is sometimes undertaken free of charge ? Underpaid staff ? > > +1 and makes sense.. > > 3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less. > > > > Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ? > > The chair never responded to this adequetly in his most recent submission. > > 4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k. Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year. > > > > Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr? > The chairs response to this was never clear in his most recent submission of fees. > > > 5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k. > > > > Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016? > > This was never responded too adequetly? > > Regards, > > K > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Thu Jul 14 07:29:40 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 10:29:40 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: On 28 Jun 2016 19:08, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" wrote: > > Dear Chairman > > Thank you Mr. Chairman for your response which unfortunately has not addressed the two main issues I raised in my email. > > > > Allow me to restate the questions here once again: > > What problem are solving? > What options have been evaluated? > What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources? > Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price? > Have we done impact analysis? > What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. ) > What is expected impact on revenue and how we plan to use it? > We never recieved any feedback to this important questions. The most recent submission by the chair on the same was not clear either. > Thank you, > > Marcus > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Jul 13 15:41:25 2016 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:41:25 -0500 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Appointment oc Chair and Vice Chair In-Reply-To: <57861B05.50401@posix.co.za> References: <0E5ED341-94F4-476B-AC09-6777A73099EA@afrinic.net> <57861B05.50401@posix.co.za> Message-ID: +1 Rgds, McTim On 13 Jul 2016 05:42, "Mark Elkins" wrote: > Congratulations to Sunday an Haitham on their re-appointments as Chair > and Vice-Chair. > > I believe that this continuation of responsibility is good for the > stability of the AFRINIC Board and by extension good for AFRINIC, the > AFRINIC membership and broader AFRINIC community. > > On 12/07/2016 17:43, Alan Barrett wrote: > > During a Board meeting on 6 July 2016, the AFRINIC Board reappointed > > Sunday Folayan as Chairperson, and Haitham el-Nakhal as > > Vice-Chairperson, for one year terms. > > -- > 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 silber.mike at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 09:38:08 2016 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 11:38:08 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unanswered Questions (was Re: AFRINIC Council of Elders) In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <7F5D71B5-A224-4F6C-B8C6-1D5844CBBAE2@gmail.com> Noah I really don?t want to get embroiled in the debate on the initial topic - hence the subject change. You raise a very important issue, that in your view the Board and the executive have not responded to (seemingly) several questions and queries put to them. If you are going to be taken seriously: then please go to the effort of pulling out the specific questions you believe have not been answered. A vague reference to reminders really does not take this forward. As we have seen on the fees question: some questions raised were in fact answered, however it seems that the answers were not seen or were not deemed adequate (and some questions considered as so arithmetically obvious as not warranting a response). I don?t have any outstanding questions, so I cannot comment of how many questions remain unanswered and what is their content. However I will support your request for answers 100% if you can please do the exercise of identifying what questions remain unanswered. I would also suggest that someone create a tracking list. This could be a community member. Put it in a collaboration tool like Google docs and let people add questions and then add the answers as they come up on this list. It should not be replacement for this list but purely a tracking tool - unless others thing differently. That way we can avoid this debate of what has been asked and what has been answered and actually have a way of tracking the issue. Thoughts, comments most welcome. Mike > On 14 Jul 2016, at 09:20, Noah wrote: > > > On 14 Jul 2016 10:16, "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > > > > > > Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? > > > > Refer to all the reminders you will see from on the mailing lists.. > > > Owen > > > > > > Noah > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Jul 14 09:59:08 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 12:59:08 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Unanswered Questions (was Re: AFRINIC Council of Elders) In-Reply-To: <7F5D71B5-A224-4F6C-B8C6-1D5844CBBAE2@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> <7F5D71B5-A224-4F6C-B8C6-1D5844CBBAE2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Mike Silber wrote: > Noah > > Hi Mike, > I really don?t want to get embroiled in the debate on the initial topic - > hence the subject change. > > You raise a very important issue, that in your view the Board and the > executive have not responded to (seemingly) several questions and queries > put to them. If you are going to be taken seriously: then please go to the > effort of pulling out the specific questions you believe have not been > answered. A vague reference to reminders really does not take this forward. > > Yes I agree and I have clearly uprooted some of the questions which had not been vividly answered and as I write, I have read some responses from the CEO this far. > As we have seen on the fees question: some questions raised were in fact > answered, however it seems that the answers were not seen or were not > deemed adequate (and some questions considered as so arithmetically obvious > as not warranting a response). > > Yes and i dont disagree that there was no response. The CEO just responded to some in his earlier feedback to me regarding some of those questions and am so far happy but I will give more feedback. > I don?t have any outstanding questions, so I cannot comment of how many > questions remain unanswered and what is their content. > > However I will support your request for answers 100% if you can please do > the exercise of identifying what questions remain unanswered. > Thank you and I have done that less i get accused of making unnecessary unfounded noise. > > I would also suggest that someone create a tracking list. This could be a > community member. Put it in a collaboration tool like Google docs and let > people add questions and then add the answers as they come up on this list. > It should not be replacement for this list but purely a tracking tool - > unless others thing differently. > > This is a good suggestion and in fact I care to always note some of them as I believe each question regardless of its weight in important. In fact this would clear the air else we end up thinking issues are being swept under the carpet or deliberately ignored. > That way we can avoid this debate of what has been asked and what has been > answered and actually have a way of tracking the issue. > 100% agree. > > Thoughts, comments most welcome. > > Mike > > Cheers, Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 14:18:32 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 07:18:32 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> > On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:20 , Noah wrote: > > > On 14 Jul 2016 10:16, "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > > > > > > Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? > > > > Refer to all the reminders you will see from on the mailing lists.. > > And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. There have been so many questions, some relevant, some not so relevant over the past unspecified time, some answered, some not, so it is impossible to determine which questions, exactly, you feel have not been adequately answered. Again, I call on you to actually provide specifics or recognize that your subjective and unverifiable claims are nothing more than unsubstantiated grousing which is of no use to the community. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Thu Jul 14 14:34:35 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:34:35 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> Message-ID: <444EED8D-A481-4783-80ED-72DCF55F764C@afrinic.net> > On 14 Jul 2016, at 18:18, Owen DeLong wrote: >> On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:20 , Noah wrote: >> > Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? >> > >> >> Refer to all the reminders you will see from on the mailing lists.. >> >> > And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. I think Noah meant something like ?I will soon post some reminders on the mailing lists?. Subsequent to that message, he did in fact post some explicit questions, which I answered on the members-discuss list. Alan Barrett From owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 14:45:19 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 07:45:19 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: <50BAE710-A24E-4EE7-8DE0-47AD2AA32C64@delong.com> > > 3. AFRINIC requires more revenue, not less. > > > > > > > > Why does AFRINIC requires more revenue ? For what purpose ? > > > > > > The chair never responded to this adequetly in his most recent submission. > A competent reading of the audited financial statements from the last 2 years will pretty well cover this. > > > > 4. If the proposed charging scheme had been in place during 2015, then income from allocation and assignment fees would have been about USD 550k. Actual income from allocation and assignment fees in 2015 was about USD 350k. Therefore, the clarification that allocation or assignment fees are once per allocation or assignment, not once per member, is expected to raise about USD 200k per year. > > > > > > > > Motive behind an expected US $200k/yr? > > > > The chairs response to this was never clear in his most recent submission of fees. > First, my impression is that this is a clarification of and correction in previous erroneous implementation of the existing fee structure. To my understanding, this is sufficient explanation. To address your comments on an expected 200k/year? Using a one-year snapshot on the year with the most allocation/assignment activity in history is hardly demonstrative of the likely average amount. However, even assuming that it is 200k/year, that isn?t unreasonable given that for 2015, AfriNIC contributed only 402,245 to its reserves bringing the total reserves to 1,683,932 vs. an annual operating expense of 3,884,049. It is not unreasonable for an organization to have at least a one year (ideally 2) reserve and AfriNIC is far below this. Adding 200k/year to the reserves would help bring this to a more normal state and then perhaps a fee reduction could be considered once the reserves have been restored. At the rate of 600k/year, it will still take almost 10 years to get to a 7.5 Million dollar reserve which is really what AfriNIC should have just based on widely accepted good business practices and the data from the annual report. I trust that the board knows this. I suspect they had reasons for not being quite so explicit about it, but since I am not privy to those reasons, I am happy to help you read the AFS as needed. > > > > 5. Since it is being introduced in the middle of 2016, the impact on the 2016 revenue is expected to be an additional USD 100k. > > > > > > > > Motive behind an expected additional US $100k for 2016? > > > > > > This was never responded too adequetly? > It was, but perhaps you had trouble understanding it because it was not sufficiently explicit. See my response to the previous question for the explicit details. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 15:18:32 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 08:18:32 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:29 , Noah wrote: > > > On 28 Jun 2016 19:08, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" > wrote: > > > > Dear Chairman > > > > Thank you Mr. Chairman for your response which unfortunately has not addressed the two main issues I raised in my email. > > > > > I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate: > > > > > Allow me to restate the questions here once again: > > > > What problem are solving? > AfriNIC?s annual revenue is dangerously close to its operating budget and AfriNIC has a woefully inadequate operating reserve of roughly one quarter of continued operations. This should be roughly 2 years by standard good business practices. > > What options have been evaluated? > All of AfriNICs revenues come from two sources? Fees (the vast majority of the revenue) and investment income from the reserves (especially low at the moment due to the frighteningly small reserve). The only way to increase the investment income would be to increase the reserves. The only way to increase the reserves is to increase revenue. If you can?t increase the investment income first, then that leaves only some form of increase in total revenue from fees. Since the fee structure was, in part, falling short due to an error in implementation, clarifying that fact and correcting that implementation seems like low hanging fruit IMHO. Other options that have been mentioned were increases in fee amounts, removal or reduction of some fee exemptions, and cost cutting measures, some of which have been implemented. > > What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources? > These are two different things. Your membership fee based on category is an annual maintenance fee which you pay to sustain the organization and keep your records in the database, etc. The fee per resource is (at least theoretically) to cover the staff time required to review your application and the other expenses associated with that process. > > Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price? > It would be utterly and completely irresponsible to reduce membership fees when revenues are so perilously close to the operating expenses and the reserves are so dangerously low. > > Have we done impact analysis? > Admittedly, I haven?t seen an answer to this question, but I confess I didn?t see the question in the earlier seas of accusations and fomenting dissent, so perhaps I missed the answer as well or perhaps it got lost in the other comments. In any case, it seems to me that the answer is irrelevant and the question you really want is ?What was the outcome of the impact analysis?? After all, if the board were to day ?Yes, we did the analysis.?, then you really don?t know anything useful that you didn?t know before. If the board says ?No, no analysis was done.?, then similarly, there?s no useful information gained. I will say that the most obvious impact is that a few organizations requesting resources will pay slightly more for those resources and that AfriNIC will be able to restore its needed reserves over the next 10 years or so. This seems like a reasonable balance between the need to restore the reserves and make the organization financially sustainable and an effort to minimize the impact on members and subscribers. > > What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. ) > As with the previous question, I admit I haven?t noticed the question or the answer in previous discussion. However, since the premise of this question is false, perhaps a simple clarification of the premise will suffice. When one gets a new allocation in a given year, your annual fee for that year does not increase. You pay the allocation fee only. The following year, when your annual renewal comes up, you will pay the increased annual fee for your new tier. So, if you are so completely sensitive to this issue, you can mitigate it 100% by timing your resource request for just after your annual renewal. > > What is expected impact on revenue and how we plan to use it? > > > > We never recieved any feedback to this important questions. > This can be computed from public statistics and at least one person has already done so on the list and determined based on the 2015 run rate that it would be roughly $200k. I haven?t done the analysis myself, but assuming his numbers are roughly correct, then I would argue the most responsible way to use it is to bolster the reserves for at least the next 9+ years, barring unforeseen events. > The most recent submission by the chair on the same was not clear either. > Perhaps he didn?t feel the need to rehash data already publicly available in the AFS and other previous statements from the board. In any case, if you feel the above answers are inadequate, please ask specific additional clarifying questions. Note, the above are based on public statements from the board and information from the AFS, not my conjecture or opinion except to the following extent: 1. Common good business practice is to have a 2 year operating reserve. 2. My clarification of the purpose of the two distinct fees is conjecture on my part based on statements from staff of varoius RIRs in in-person discussions and my reading of the fee information from the AfriNIC web site. I do not know whether the board has publicly stated the same or not. I would argue that item 1 is simply well known good business practice and that any reasonable person could intuit item 2 from the information on the web site. However, I want to be clear about the sources of my information in these posts, so I provide that detail in the interest of full disclosure. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 15:52:19 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 08:52:19 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <444EED8D-A481-4783-80ED-72DCF55F764C@afrinic.net> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> <444EED8D-A481-4783-80ED-72DCF55F764C@afrinic.net> Message-ID: > On Jul 14, 2016, at 07:34 , Alan Barrett wrote: > > >> On 14 Jul 2016, at 18:18, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:20 , Noah wrote: >>>> Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? >>>> >>> >>> Refer to all the reminders you will see from on the mailing lists.. >>> >>> >> And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. > > I think Noah meant something like ?I will soon post some reminders on the mailing lists?. Subsequent to that message, he did in fact post some explicit questions, which I answered on the members-discuss list. Indeed? He also posted it to community-discuss and I responded there? The vast majority of his questions had actually been previously answered. Owen > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From madomey at hotmail.com Thu Jul 14 16:07:21 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 16:07:21 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> References: , <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za>, , <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za>, , <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za>, <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com>, , , <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za>, , <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com>, , <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net>, , , , , , , , <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> Message-ID: Dear Owen, > And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. Are you saying that you have never seen any reminder on this mailing list because of unanswered question? Well let me roll back your mind. On June 26, 2016 I sent a mail with the subject "Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees?" with specific questions (See below). The chair promised to revert. Indeed, on Jul 8, 2016 in a mail with subject ?AFRINIC - Matters Arising? he reverted with a "philosophical lecture" which did not answer questions in my email. On July 11, 2016, I responded to that email and reminded him of the questions. Till now pointed it out, none of those questions have been answered. And you say there is no unsubstantiated claim here? With all due respect, it seems to me that you are having challenges following the threads of the mails. Moreso your two sentences (below) are showing illogical connection (make a claim and disprove it with one?s own arguments). > And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. > There have been so many questions, some relevant, some not so relevant over the past unspecified time, some answered, some not, so it is impossible to determine which questions, exactly, you feel have not been adequately answered. We need a break with this discourse which has the purpose to shield the board from being accountable for their stewardship to the community. Are you saying the Board only need to reach out to the Community when elections are due and turn around to say the Board can do as we wish? Cheers!!! Marcus From: owen at delong.com Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 07:18:32 -0700 To: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:20 , Noah wrote: On 14 Jul 2016 10:16, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > Do you have any such specific references? Can you repeat any specific questions which have not been adequately answered? >Refer to all the reminders you will see from on the mailing lists.. And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. There have been so many questions, some relevant, some not so relevant over the past unspecified time, some answered, some not, so it is impossible to determine which questions, exactly, you feel have not been adequately answered. Again, I call on you to actually provide specifics or recognize that your subjective and unverifiable claims are nothing more than unsubstantiated grousing which is of no use to the community. 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 owen at delong.com Thu Jul 14 16:57:19 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 09:57:19 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> Message-ID: <6EA2B59F-D601-4B36-AC74-E5C2CBB1C80E@delong.com> > On Jul 14, 2016, at 09:07 , Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > Dear Owen, > > > And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. > > Are you saying that you have never seen any reminder on this mailing list because of unanswered question? > > Well let me roll back your mind. On June 26, 2016 I sent a mail with the subject "Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees?" with specific questions (See below). > > The chair promised to revert. Indeed, on Jul 8, 2016 in a mail with subject ?AFRINIC - Matters Arising? he reverted with a "philosophical lecture" which did not answer questions in my email. On July 11, 2016, I responded to that email and reminded him of the questions. Till now pointed it out, none of those questions have been answered. And you say there is no unsubstantiated claim here? > > With all due respect, it seems to me that you are having challenges following the threads of the mails. Moreso your two sentences (below) are showing illogical connection (make a claim and disprove it with one?s own arguments). > > > And once again, a vague unverifiable and thus unsubstantiated claim. > > There have been so many questions, some relevant, some not so relevant over the past unspecified time, some answered, some not, so it is impossible to determine which questions, exactly, you feel have not been adequately answered. > > We need a break with this discourse which has the purpose to shield the board from being accountable for their stewardship to the community. Are you saying the Board only need to reach out to the Community when elections are due and turn around to say the Board can do as we wish? > You are, of course, entitled to your own opinion. However, I have no intention whatsoever to shield the board from accountability. Statement 2 does not contradict statement 1. It clarifies that statement 1 is true because an unspecified reference to ?questions? is meaningless for the reasons stated. I will note that subsequent to the posting to which I made that reply, Noah did, in fact, provide a list of questions. Once I saw that, I responded with a collection of answers based on previous information provided by the board in the form of either various list postings, public statements, and/or contents of the AFS. If you have different questions that you still feel were not adequately answered, please restate them in a reply here. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From madomey at hotmail.com Thu Jul 14 17:08:33 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 17:08:33 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: , <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> , , , Message-ID: Dear Owen, I am happy to know that you are the PR or/and the lawyer of the board. Based on your sentence <"I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate:">, the following points are in order for your meditation. A series of questions has been asked in a coherent manner. You are claiming that the questions have been answered in this mailing list. What you have attempted to do is to put together the piecemeal statements made by the chair in his various emails, extracting sense out of them to answer the questions I asked. A very good exercise of the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board (LOL). Do you want to tell me that it is coherent, professional, pedagogically and andragogically, and responsible (name them) from our chair to answer specific set questions in piecemeal? I have read and analyze thoroughly your email. In fact, the best I can say about it is it is a very good piece to show empty verbiage case. The questions I asked were straight forward questions which answers should be factual and in case there is not fact, with humility acknowledge it. Again you are turned yourself into the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board shielding him to be accountable. Your empty verbiage has not answered the questions. We want to hear from the horse's mouth. Cheers!!! Marcus From: owen at delong.com Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 08:18:32 -0700 To: community-discuss at afrinic.net CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:29 , Noah wrote: On 28 Jun 2016 19:08, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" wrote: > > Dear Chairman > > Thank you Mr. Chairman for your response which unfortunately has not addressed the two main issues I raised in my email. > >I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate: > > Allow me to restate the questions here once again: > > What problem are solving? AfriNIC?s annual revenue is dangerously close to its operating budget and AfriNIC has a woefully inadequate operating reserve of roughly one quarter of continued operations. This should be roughly 2 years by standard good business practices. > What options have been evaluated? All of AfriNICs revenues come from two sources? Fees (the vast majority of the revenue) and investment income from the reserves (especially low at the moment due to the frighteningly small reserve). The only way to increase the investment income would be to increase the reserves. The only way to increase the reserves is to increase revenue. If you can?t increase the investment income first, then that leaves only some form of increase in total revenue from fees. Since the fee structure was, in part, falling short due to an error in implementation, clarifying that fact and correcting that implementation seems like low hanging fruit IMHO. Other options that have been mentioned were increases in fee amounts, removal or reduction of some fee exemptions, and cost cutting measures, some of which have been implemented.> What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources? These are two different things. Your membership fee based on category is an annual maintenance fee which you pay to sustain the organization and keep your records in the database, etc. The fee per resource is (at least theoretically) to cover the staff time required to review your application and the other expenses associated with that process. > Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price? It would be utterly and completely irresponsible to reduce membership fees when revenues are so perilously close to the operating expenses and the reserves are so dangerously low. > Have we done impact analysis? Admittedly, I haven?t seen an answer to this question, but I confess I didn?t see the question in the earlier seas of accusations and fomenting dissent, so perhaps I missed the answer as well or perhaps it got lost in the other comments. In any case, it seems to me that the answer is irrelevant and the question you really want is ?What was the outcome of the impact analysis?? After all, if the board were to day ?Yes, we did the analysis.?, then you really don?t know anything useful that you didn?t know before. If the board says ?No, no analysis was done.?, then similarly, there?s no useful information gained. I will say that the most obvious impact is that a few organizations requesting resources will pay slightly more for those resources and that AfriNIC will be able to restore its needed reserves over the next 10 years or so. This seems like a reasonable balance between the need to restore the reserves and make the organization financially sustainable and an effort to minimize the impact on members and subscribers. > What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. ) As with the previous question, I admit I haven?t noticed the question or the answer in previous discussion. However, since the premise of this question is false, perhaps a simple clarification of the premise will suffice. When one gets a new allocation in a given year, your annual fee for that year does not increase. You pay the allocation fee only. The following year, when your annual renewal comes up, you will pay the increased annual fee for your new tier. So, if you are so completely sensitive to this issue, you can mitigate it 100% by timing your resource request for just after your annual renewal. > What is expected impact on revenue and how we plan to use it? >We never recieved any feedback to this important questions.This can be computed from public statistics and at least one person has already done so on the list and determined based on the 2015 run rate that it would be roughly $200k. I haven?t done the analysis myself, but assuming his numbers are roughly correct, then I would argue the most responsible way to use it is to bolster the reserves for at least the next 9+ years, barring unforeseen events. The most recent submission by the chair on the same was not clear either. Perhaps he didn?t feel the need to rehash data already publicly available in the AFS and other previous statements from the board. In any case, if you feel the above answers are inadequate, please ask specific additional clarifying questions. Note, the above are based on public statements from the board and information from the AFS, not my conjecture or opinion except to the following extent: 1. Common good business practice is to have a 2 year operating reserve.2. My clarification of the purpose of the two distinct fees is conjecture on my part based on statements from staff of varoius RIRs in in-person discussions and my reading of the fee information from the AfriNIC web site. I do not know whether the board has publicly stated the same or not. I would argue that item 1 is simply well known good business practice and that any reasonable person could intuit item 2 from the information on the web site. However, I want to be clear about the sources of my information in these posts, so I provide that detail in the interest of full disclosure. 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 noah at neo.co.tz Thu Jul 14 19:02:41 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 22:02:41 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <7D0D93EF-B4C9-4F3F-B590-E471B33CFEA5@afrinic.net> <80D842D5-BB86-45F8-BD51-C07FC9ACE0D1@delong.com> <444EED8D-A481-4783-80ED-72DCF55F764C@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On 14 Jul 2016 18:56, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > > On Jul 14, 2016, at 07:34 , Alan Barrett wrote: > > > > > > I think Noah meant something like ?I will soon post some reminders on the mailing lists?. Subsequent to that message, he did in fact post some explicit questions, which I answered on the members-discuss list. > > Indeed? He also posted it to community-discuss and I responded there? The vast majority of his questions had actually been previously answered. > They were never adequetly answered and the CEO did try to go in depth to clarify. Dont assume that everyone thinks in the same wavelength as you. Where i need further clarification I will gladly seek the Chairs or the CEO's clarification as a resource member. When i feel something has not been answered with clarify i will seek more explainations. More that you will ever wish, I like so many others seek the best for our RIR. > Owen > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aalain at trstech.net Thu Jul 14 22:12:52 2016 From: aalain at trstech.net (ALAIN AINA) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 02:12:52 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> Message-ID: <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> { a bit late on this discussion, but think i should add this for the record} Hi, We all were in Tunis and you are welcome to your opinions but I know you remember what transpired as well as I do. We all saw the professional manner in which Badru dealt with the issues the board experienced and how these were exposed to the community. The issue seemed to have root in board internal dysfunction which traced back to November 2014. Some of the actors have left the board, but some are still acting as Director for the organisation. I would not take us back to that very bad time in AFRINIC?s life, but i like to remind us of two major outcomes of Tunis which are ?GC? and ?Publication of Board meeting minutes?. The resolutions below followed : ======== june 2015 Resolution 201506.233 In the interest of accountability and transparency resolves to henceforth publish the minutes of the Board meeting within 7 days of its approval from the Board. Resolution 201506.234 Resolves to publish the minutes of the meetings of the Board from June 2014 in such format approved by the Board. -====== So far, nothing has changed at http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bod/meeting/2014 and nobody can tell what happened in November 2014. Hope this helps those that were not there or were not following ?Alain > On Jul 13, 2016, at 11:43 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > > I wasn?t on the board, but I was present at the Tunis meeting. > > Owen > >> On Jul 13, 2016, at 10:11 , Timothy Ola Akinfenwa > wrote: >> >> +1 Mark. This clarification was indeed necessary. ? >> >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Mark Elkins > wrote: >> Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. >> >> Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the >> Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. >> I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. >> >> There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you >> were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea >> that there was bad blood between various parties. >> >> I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to >> having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as >> such, CoE). >> >> Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and >> hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying >> to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would >> not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on >> the CoE. >> >> On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: >> > >> >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Nishal +1 >> >> >> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were >> >> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even >> >> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that >> >> would disqualify them as a director. >> >> >> >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE >> >> member, or a convict. >> >> >> >> >> >> No community would. We want them because of their experience as >> >> former Chairs >> >> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider >> >> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >> >> >> >> >> >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >> >> >> >> >> >> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are >> >> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this >> >> improve trust? >> > >> > Omo, >> > >> > You are claiming facts not in evidence. >> > >> > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been >> > considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of >> > action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that >> > it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. >> > >> > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on >> > is nonsensical. >> > >> > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They >> > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and >> > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If >> > you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next >> > time there is an election. >> > >> > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the >> > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from >> > the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they >> > choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this >> > is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever >> > decision they make. >> > >> > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to >> > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. >> > >> > Owen >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 benjamin.eshun at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 22:43:11 2016 From: benjamin.eshun at gmail.com (Benjamin Eshun) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 22:43:11 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> Message-ID: <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> Chair Sunday, When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings as it being after a 1 year, the minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can expect it. Benjamin On Jul 14, 2016, at 10:12 PM, ALAIN AINA wrote: { a bit late on this discussion, but think i should add this for the record} Hi, We all were in Tunis and you are welcome to your opinions but I know you remember what transpired as well as I do. We all saw the professional manner in which Badru dealt with the issues the board experienced and how these were exposed to the community. The issue seemed to have root in board internal dysfunction which traced back to November 2014. Some of the actors have left the board, but some are still acting as Director for the organisation. I would not take us back to that very bad time in AFRINIC?s life, but i like to remind us of two major outcomes of Tunis which are ?GC? and ?Publication of Board meeting minutes?. The resolutions below followed : ======== june 2015 Resolution 201506.233 In the interest of accountability and transparency resolves to henceforth publish the minutes of the Board meeting within 7 days of its approval from the Board. Resolution 201506.234 Resolves to publish the minutes of the meetings of the Board from June 2014 in such format approved by the Board. -====== So far, nothing has changed at http://www.afrinic.net/en/about/bod/meeting/2014 and nobody can tell what happened in November 2014. Hope this helps those that were not there or were not following ?Alain > On Jul 13, 2016, at 11:43 PM, Owen DeLong wrote: > > Mark?s clarification is exactly what I was referring to when I said that I > believed the board had adequate reasons not to place Badrue on the CoE. > > I wasn?t on the board, but I was present at the Tunis meeting. > > Owen > >> On Jul 13, 2016, at 10:11 , Timothy Ola Akinfenwa wrote: >> >> +1 Mark. This clarification was indeed necessary. ? >> >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Mark Elkins wrote: >>> Badru stopped being the Chair of AFRINIC at the last Mauritius meeting. >>> >>> Badru left the Board over a year ago in Tunisia. He resigned after the >>> Board had an impromptu meeting on stage during the meeting. >>> I believe that one can guess he was asked to resign by the Board. >>> >>> There were a number of ugly words exchanged at that meeting and if you >>> were present at that meeting, I believe that you would have got the idea >>> that there was bad blood between various parties. >>> >>> I was on the Board at that time. Personally, I would not have agreed to >>> having Badru in the honourably position of being a community elder (as >>> such, CoE). >>> >>> Any Board Member who steps down and who causes such disarray and >>> hostility should expect to be kept at a distance. Please, I'm not trying >>> to pick on Badru, but on the situation and actions at the time. It would >>> not be rational to then honour such a past Chairperson with a seat on >>> the CoE. >>> >>> On 13/07/2016 09:40, Owen DeLong wrote: >>> > >>> >> On Jul 12, 2016, at 22:01 , Omo Oaiya >> >> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On 12 July 2016 at 21:03, Mike Silber >> >> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Nishal +1 >>> >> >>> >> Maybe a hypothetical if I may: what if a former Chairperson were >>> >> to pass, or to be unable or unwilling to serve on the CoE, or even >>> >> if they were to be convicted of an offense after their term that >>> >> would disqualify them as a director. >>> >> >>> >> I don't think the community would want an unable or unwilling CoE >>> >> member, or a convict. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> No community would. We want them because of their experience as >>> >> former Chairs >>> >> I read the 'open to' in 16.1 as former chairs are willing to consider >>> >> or be considered. So some might decline or be denied >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> So I cannot see how automatic appointment could be implied. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> This is what bothers me. We don't yet have 6 past chairs and we are >>> >> discriminating without reason on appointment to CoE? How does this >>> >> improve trust? >>> > >>> > Omo, >>> > >>> > You are claiming facts not in evidence. >>> > >>> > The board chair clearly stated that the matter has not yet been >>> > considered by the board. This is not discrimination, it is a lack of >>> > action in either direction, positive or negative. He further noted that >>> > it will be on the agenda at the next board meeting. >>> > >>> > Claiming discrimination when there clearly isn?t any such thing going on >>> > is nonsensical. >>> > >>> > Finally, appointment to the CoE is at the discretion of the board. They >>> > are free to invite a past chair or not entirely at their discretion and >>> > nothing requires them to explain their reasoning to the community. If >>> > you don?t like their decision, vote for different board members next >>> > time there is an election. >>> > >>> > Personally, given the manner in which Badru stepped down from the >>> > chairmanship and the subsequent incidents leading to his departure from >>> > the board, I would say that the board has more than ample reason if they >>> > choose not to invite him to join the CoE. However, I respect that this >>> > is a decision entirely at their discretion and I will accept whatever >>> > decision they make. >>> > >>> > The purpose of the CoE is to advise the board. The board must be free to >>> > choose who it does or does not want to receive advice from. >>> > >>> > Owen >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jul 15 03:47:47 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 20:47:47 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 14, 2016, at 10:08 , Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > Dear Owen, > > I am happy to know that you are the PR or/and the lawyer of the board. Based on your sentence <"I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate:">, the following points are in order for your meditation. > > A series of questions has been asked in a coherent manner. You are claiming that the questions have been answered in this mailing list. What you have attempted to do is to put together the piecemeal statements made by the chair in his various emails, extracting sense out of them to answer the questions I asked. A very good exercise of the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board (LOL). Do you want to tell me that it is coherent, professional, pedagogically and andragogically, and responsible (name them) from our chair to answer specific set questions in piecemeal? The questions were originally asked piecemeal and originally answered as and when they were asked. I am not the lawyer or the PR person for the board. > > I have read and analyze thoroughly your email. In fact, the best I can say about it is it is a very good piece to show empty verbiage case. The questions I asked were straight forward questions which answers should be factual and in case there is not fact, with humility acknowledge it. Again you are turned yourself into the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board shielding him to be accountable. Your empty verbiage has not answered the questions. We want to hear from the horse's mouth. Then I suggest you go back and review the list yourself and pull from it the chair?s previous answers to the questions when they were originally asked. Calling the information I provided empty verbiage simply because I am not the chair is silly at best and disingenuous. I did, in fact, provide factual answers to each of your questions as did the CEO of the organization. I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I have no desire to participate in that exercise. Owen > > Cheers!!! > > > > Marcus > > > From: owen at delong.com > Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 08:18:32 -0700 > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > > > On Jul 14, 2016, at 00:29 , Noah > wrote: > > > On 28 Jun 2016 19:08, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" > wrote: > > > > Dear Chairman > > > > Thank you Mr. Chairman for your response which unfortunately has not addressed the two main issues I raised in my email. > > > > > I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate: > > > > > > Allow me to restate the questions here once again: > > > > What problem are solving? > > AfriNIC?s annual revenue is dangerously close to its operating budget and AfriNIC has a woefully inadequate operating reserve of roughly one quarter of continued operations. This should be roughly 2 years by standard good business practices. > > What options have been evaluated? > All of AfriNICs revenues come from two sources? Fees (the vast majority of the revenue) and investment income from the reserves (especially low at the moment due to the frighteningly small reserve). > > The only way to increase the investment income would be to increase the reserves. > > The only way to increase the reserves is to increase revenue. > > If you can?t increase the investment income first, then that leaves only some form of increase in total revenue from fees. > > Since the fee structure was, in part, falling short due to an error in implementation, clarifying that fact and correcting that implementation seems like low hanging fruit IMHO. > > Other options that have been mentioned were increases in fee amounts, removal or reduction of some fee exemptions, and cost cutting measures, some of which have been implemented. > > What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources? > > These are two different things. Your membership fee based on category is an annual maintenance fee which you pay to sustain the organization and keep your records in the database, etc. > > The fee per resource is (at least theoretically) to cover the staff time required to review your application and the other expenses associated with that process. > > Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price? > It would be utterly and completely irresponsible to reduce membership fees when revenues are so perilously close to the operating expenses and the reserves are so dangerously low. > > Have we done impact analysis? > Admittedly, I haven?t seen an answer to this question, but I confess I didn?t see the question in the earlier seas of accusations and fomenting dissent, so perhaps I missed the answer as well or perhaps it got lost in the other comments. > > In any case, it seems to me that the answer is irrelevant and the question you really want is ?What was the outcome of the impact analysis?? > > After all, if the board were to day ?Yes, we did the analysis.?, then you really don?t know anything useful that you didn?t know before. If the board says ?No, no analysis was done.?, then similarly, there?s no useful information gained. > > I will say that the most obvious impact is that a few organizations requesting resources will pay slightly more for those resources and that AfriNIC will be able to restore its needed reserves over the next 10 years or so. This seems like a reasonable balance between the need to restore the reserves and make the organization financially sustainable and an effort to minimize the impact on members and subscribers. > > What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. ) > As with the previous question, I admit I haven?t noticed the question or the answer in previous discussion. > > However, since the premise of this question is false, perhaps a simple clarification of the premise will suffice. > > When one gets a new allocation in a given year, your annual fee for that year does not increase. You pay the allocation fee only. The following year, when your annual renewal comes up, you will pay the increased annual fee for your new tier. So, if you are so completely sensitive to this issue, you can mitigate it 100% by timing your resource request for just after your annual renewal. > > > What is expected impact on revenue and how we plan to use it? > > > We never recieved any feedback to this important questions. > This can be computed from public statistics and at least one person has already done so on the list and determined based on the 2015 run rate that it would be roughly $200k. > > I haven?t done the analysis myself, but assuming his numbers are roughly correct, then I would argue the most responsible way to use it is to bolster the reserves for at least the next 9+ years, barring unforeseen events. > The most recent submission by the chair on the same was not clear either. > Perhaps he didn?t feel the need to rehash data already publicly available in the AFS and other previous statements from the board. > > In any case, if you feel the above answers are inadequate, please ask specific additional clarifying questions. Note, the above are based on public statements from the board and information from the AFS, not my conjecture or opinion except to the following extent: > > 1. Common good business practice is to have a 2 year operating reserve. > 2. My clarification of the purpose of the two distinct fees is conjecture on my part based on statements from > staff of varoius RIRs in in-person discussions and my reading of the fee information from the AfriNIC > web site. I do not know whether the board has publicly stated the same or not. > > I would argue that item 1 is simply well known good business practice and that any reasonable person could intuit item 2 from the information on the web site. However, I want to be clear about the sources of my information in these posts, so I provide that detail in the interest of full disclosure. > > 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 mark.tinka at seacom.mu Fri Jul 15 05:03:31 2016 From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 07:03:31 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] SAFNOG-3: Just 3 Weeks Left Message-ID: <6848961e-0301-924a-891a-c15f7f506698@seacom.mu> Hello all. With a little over 3 weeks left to SAFNOG-3, the program is shaping up to be very exciting. You can view it here: http://www.safnog.org/event-name/ If you are interested in participating in SAFNOG-3 as a speaker or panelist, there are still a few slots left in the agenda. Kindly review the details of the CfP and submit your talk at the link below: http://www.safnog.org/#callforpapers Travel and hotel venue information about Windhoek, Namibia, can be found here: http://www.safnog.org/travel-information For the social events at this year's SAFNOG meeting, we have organized welcome drinks from 1700hrs by the pool side at the hotel venue on the 7th August: https://www.safarihotelsnamibia.com/safari-court-hotel/ On the 8th August, an opening cocktail in the evening has been planned for at Joe's Beer House: http://www.joesbeerhouse.com/home.html Our closing social will take place on the 9th August, with a braai and dinner at the hotel venue. On the 10th August, a game drive has been prepared at the Okapuka Ranch: http://www.okapuka-ranch.com/main.html All social events will be complimentary to our SAFNOG-3 delegates. We look forward to seeing you in Windhoek. Cheers, Mark Tinka On Behalf of the SAFNOG Management Committee From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Fri Jul 15 05:26:44 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:26:44 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> Message-ID: <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> > On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun wrote: > > Chair Sunday, > > When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings as it being after a 1 year, the > minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can expect it. Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be published) is ongoing. I expect it to be done by the end of 2016. Alan Barrett From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Fri Jul 15 05:38:17 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:38:17 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> Marcus, Please conduct yourself politely. Messages such as the one quoted below have no place on AFRINIC mailing lists. Alan Barrett > On 14 Jul 2016, at 21:08, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > Dear Owen, > > I am happy to know that you are the PR or/and the lawyer of the board. Based on your sentence <"I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate:">, the following points are in order for your meditation. > > A series of questions has been asked in a coherent manner. You are claiming that the questions have been answered in this mailing list. What you have attempted to do is to put together the piecemeal statements made by the chair in his various emails, extracting sense out of them to answer the questions I asked. A very good exercise of the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board (LOL). Do you want to tell me that it is coherent, professional, pedagogically and andragogically, and responsible (name them) from our chair to answer specific set questions in piecemeal? > > I have read and analyze thoroughly your email. In fact, the best I can say about it is it is a very good piece to show empty verbiage case. The questions I asked were straight forward questions which answers should be factual and in case there is not fact, with humility acknowledge it. Again you are turned yourself into the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board shielding him to be accountable. Your empty verbiage has not answered the questions. We want to hear from the horse's mouth. > > Cheers!!! > > > > Marcus From jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 06:08:40 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:08:40 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> Message-ID: +1 Let's remain civil while engaging constructively for the greater benefit of the organization and entire community. On Friday, July 15, 2016, Alan Barrett wrote: > Marcus, > > Please conduct yourself politely. Messages such as the one quoted below > have no place on AFRINIC mailing lists. > > Alan Barrett > > > On 14 Jul 2016, at 21:08, Marcus K. G. Adomey > wrote: > > > > Dear Owen, > > > > I am happy to know that you are the PR or/and the lawyer of the board. > Based on your sentence <"I will provide you the answers that I have seen on > this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate:">, the following > points are in order for your meditation. > > > > A series of questions has been asked in a coherent manner. You are > claiming that the questions have been answered in this mailing list. What > you have attempted to do is to put together the piecemeal statements made > by the chair in his various emails, extracting sense out of them to answer > the questions I asked. A very good exercise of the "new PR/lawyer" of the > chair of the board (LOL). Do you want to tell me that it is coherent, > professional, pedagogically and andragogically, and responsible (name them) > from our chair to answer specific set questions in piecemeal? > > > > I have read and analyze thoroughly your email. In fact, the best I can > say about it is it is a very good piece to show empty verbiage case. The > questions I asked were straight forward questions which answers should be > factual and in case there is not fact, with humility acknowledge it. Again > you are turned yourself into the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board > shielding him to be accountable. Your empty verbiage has not answered the > questions. We want to hear from the horse's mouth. > > > > Cheers!!! > > > > > > > > Marcus > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 madomey at hotmail.com Fri Jul 15 06:56:26 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 06:56:26 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> References: , <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> , , , , , <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> Message-ID: Dear CEO, Why have you singled me out when some are notoriously impolite on this list? This is unfair to me. Marcus > From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:38:17 +0400 > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > > Marcus, > > Please conduct yourself politely. Messages such as the one quoted below have no place on AFRINIC mailing lists. > > Alan Barrett > > > On 14 Jul 2016, at 21:08, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > > > Dear Owen, > > > > I am happy to know that you are the PR or/and the lawyer of the board. Based on your sentence <"I will provide you the answers that I have seen on this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate:">, the following points are in order for your meditation. > > > > A series of questions has been asked in a coherent manner. You are claiming that the questions have been answered in this mailing list. What you have attempted to do is to put together the piecemeal statements made by the chair in his various emails, extracting sense out of them to answer the questions I asked. A very good exercise of the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board (LOL). Do you want to tell me that it is coherent, professional, pedagogically and andragogically, and responsible (name them) from our chair to answer specific set questions in piecemeal? > > > > I have read and analyze thoroughly your email. In fact, the best I can say about it is it is a very good piece to show empty verbiage case. The questions I asked were straight forward questions which answers should be factual and in case there is not fact, with humility acknowledge it. Again you are turned yourself into the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board shielding him to be accountable. Your empty verbiage has not answered the questions. We want to hear from the horse's mouth. > > > > Cheers!!! > > > > > > > > Marcus > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 07:16:42 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:16:42 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > Dear CEO, > > Why have you singled me out If he has singled you out then its indeed selective persecution... > when some are notoriously impolite on this list? ... you need to guide him and point him to those others with specific references. Especially the notorious ones. > This is unfair to me. > > Marcus > > > >> From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net >> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:38:17 +0400 >> To: community-discuss at afrinic.net >> CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees >> >> Marcus, >> >> Please conduct yourself politely. Messages such as the one quoted below >> have no place on AFRINIC mailing lists. >> >> Alan Barrett >> >> > On 14 Jul 2016, at 21:08, Marcus K. G. Adomey >> > wrote: >> > >> > Dear Owen, >> > >> > I am happy to know that you are the PR or/and the lawyer of the board. >> > Based on your sentence <"I will provide you the answers that I have seen on >> > this list and in the AFS which I think are quite adequate:">, the following >> > points are in order for your meditation. >> > >> > A series of questions has been asked in a coherent manner. You are >> > claiming that the questions have been answered in this mailing list. What >> > you have attempted to do is to put together the piecemeal statements made by >> > the chair in his various emails, extracting sense out of them to answer the >> > questions I asked. A very good exercise of the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair >> > of the board (LOL). Do you want to tell me that it is coherent, >> > professional, pedagogically and andragogically, and responsible (name them) >> > from our chair to answer specific set questions in piecemeal? >> > >> > I have read and analyze thoroughly your email. In fact, the best I can >> > say about it is it is a very good piece to show empty verbiage case. The >> > questions I asked were straight forward questions which answers should be >> > factual and in case there is not fact, with humility acknowledge it. Again >> > you are turned yourself into the "new PR/lawyer" of the chair of the board >> > shielding him to be accountable. Your empty verbiage has not answered the >> > questions. We want to hear from the horse's mouth. >> > >> > Cheers!!! >> > >> > >> > >> > Marcus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 07:21:44 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 10:21:44 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: > >> On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun wrote: >> >> Chair Sunday, >> >> When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings as it being after a 1 year, the >> minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can expect it. > > Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be published) is ongoing. What is the generally agreed practice around redacting some information in minutes when there are some persons affected by that redacted information amid a dispute? > I expect it to be done by the end of 2016. > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Fri Jul 15 09:08:54 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:08:54 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net> Message-ID: > On 15 Jul 2016, at 10:56, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > Dear CEO, > > Why have you singled me out when some are notoriously impolite on this list? This is unfair to me. I sent a general message to everybody yesterday. You are the first person to be impolite after that message was sent. Alan Barrett From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Fri Jul 15 09:19:47 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:19:47 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> Message-ID: > On 15 Jul 2016, at 11:21, Jackson Muthili wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: >> >> Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be published) is ongoing. > > What is the generally agreed practice around redacting some > information in minutes when there are some persons affected by that > redacted information amid a dispute? At the time that the meetings in question were held (2014 and 2015), the participants in the meetings expected the minutes to be kept confidential. Subsequently, the Board agreed to publish redacted versions of the minutes. Redaction must be done carefully to preserve the confidentiality of sensitive parts of the discussions, while publishing parts that are not sensitive. Alan Barrett From madomey at hotmail.com Fri Jul 15 11:37:53 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:37:53 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: , <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> , , , , , <745711F6-CE23-4432-B965-FD5AB1246324@afrinic.net>, , Message-ID: Dear CEO, I am surprise that you have identified Marcus as the first person to be impolite after your general message. Have you taken the pain the to read the emails of OWEN after your emails after your message? If NO, Kindly go back and read it carefully and identify the tone of impoliteness in those email and get back to me with unqualified apology. In case you have not understood it, do not hesitate to came back to me; I will point them out to you and no apology is required because of your inability to identify the impoliteness tone in his email. If you have really read and understood them before sending this email, then you are partial and it is unfortunate from a CEO we want to hold in high esteem. Thanks Marcus > From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 13:08:54 +0400 > To: community-discuss at afrinic.net > CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > > > > On 15 Jul 2016, at 10:56, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > > > Dear CEO, > > > > Why have you singled me out when some are notoriously impolite on this list? This is unfair to me. > > I sent a general message to everybody yesterday. You are the first person to be impolite after that message was sent. > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Jul 15 06:36:46 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:36:46 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: Owen On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" wrote: I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I have no desire to participate in that exercise. If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for the community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is best done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another RIR) What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. By that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to be cautious not to cross as a guest. You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree with Marcus?s email. To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask you do not. We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree with everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we have no choice but to co-exist. Regards Badru Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benjamin.eshun at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 14:59:09 2016 From: benjamin.eshun at gmail.com (Benjamin Eshun) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:59:09 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> Dear Alan, What secrets do we have to hide about how AfriNIC is governed? Why not provide the minutes without redaction so if it resolves this festering matter once and for all? It does not makes sense to me and it is clear that there is something to hide. The board is not able to tell the community what transpired and points fingers at those who would inform us. I would appreciate it better if the organisation was a private company or had some information that was of some trade secret value. But AfriNIC is basically a monopoly in the region and cannot have competition from any of the other RIRs. I'm beginning to see signs of elected officers of a community that unilaterally take decisions and actions without due recourse to the membership that put them there in the first place. This truly saddens me. Afrinic board meetings should be public. Benjamin On Jul 15, 2016, at 5:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: > On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun wrote: > > Chair Sunday, > > When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings as it being after a 1 year, the > minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can expect it. Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be published) is ongoing. I expect it to be done by the end of 2016. Alan Barrett _______________________________________________ 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 mbjmaa at topnet.tn Fri Jul 15 15:22:20 2016 From: mbjmaa at topnet.tn (MBJ) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:22:20 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <044b01d1deac$adf79480$09e6bd80$@tn> Dear Alan, One year and two years to write minutes is toooooo much. Please close this discussion by providing the minutes ASAP. Thanks Mustapha -----Message d'origine----- De : Alan Barrett [mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net] Envoy? : vendredi 15 juillet 2016 10:20 ? : General Discussions of AFRINIC Objet : Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > On 15 Jul 2016, at 11:21, Jackson Muthili wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: >> >> Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be published) is ongoing. > > What is the generally agreed practice around redacting some > information in minutes when there are some persons affected by that > redacted information amid a dispute? At the time that the meetings in question were held (2014 and 2015), the participants in the meetings expected the minutes to be kept confidential. Subsequently, the Board agreed to publish redacted versions of the minutes. Redaction must be done carefully to preserve the confidentiality of sensitive parts of the discussions, while publishing parts that are not sensitive. Alan Barrett _______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list Community-Discuss at afrinic.net https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss From boubakarbarry at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 16:09:49 2016 From: boubakarbarry at gmail.com (Boubakar Barry) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:09:49 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: Dear All, I think that what is going on is quite disgusting and not good for AfriNIC. Permit me to to especially address Owen Delong's behaviour. If he can't help us solving our problems, he shouldn't add more to them. Every responsible person who is an observer in any organisation such as AfriNIC, whatever the openness and inclusiveness are, would reasonably refrain him/herself from intervening in sensitive internal issues, especially when it's about governance. I personally have now the impression that AfriNIC Board and Secretariat don't exist and/or have outsourced their communication to address issues of members and the community at large. Or some people have given themselves this power and role. This is far from being good for AfriNIC and its leadership. If Mr. Delong's objective is to support AfriNIC, it would be good for him to think carefully about when and where to intervene and avoid interfering too much in AfriNIC internal issues, as many other observers are wisely doing. Boubakar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Fri Jul 15 16:12:23 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 19:12:23 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <044b01d1deac$adf79480$09e6bd80$@tn> Message-ID: On 15 Jul 2016 18:24, "MBJ" wrote: > > Dear Alan, > One year and two years to write minutes is toooooo much. Actually those minutes were to be published last year in August. Had they been published, we woudnt find ourselves in this Fiasco... > Thanks > Mustapha > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Fri Jul 15 16:47:50 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 19:47:50 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: I don't think anyone can restrict anyone on what to say or not say on a public mailing list that does not make distinction between official list members and observers. AfriNIC meetings too are open to anyone and whoever attends is free to comment about any observations on appropriate platform. It is completely unreasonable to expect a person from another RIR community to not talk freely and be called an outsider. Stick to issues. On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Badru Ntege wrote: > Owen > > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my > best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that > you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I have > no desire to participate in that exercise. > > > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for the > community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is best > done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on > outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. > (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another > RIR) > > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an > agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on > the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the > establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but > perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. > > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. By > that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to be > cautious not to cross as a guest. > > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue > the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. > > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under > discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree > with Marcus?s email. > > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask > you do not. > > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree with > everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we have no > choice but to co-exist. > > Regards > > Badru > > > > > > > Owen > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > From owen at delong.com Fri Jul 15 21:48:58 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:48:58 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 14, 2016, at 23:36 , Badru Ntege wrote: > > Owen > > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" > wrote: > >> >> I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I have no desire to participate in that exercise. > > > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for the community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is best done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another RIR) Then the community must adjust their perspective. I work for a company which has substantial operations in the AfriNIC service region. We care very deeply about what happens and whether you like it or not, as a result, I am, in fact, a member of the community and not an outsider at this point. > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome for the region and for the internet in general. Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my track record for an education. > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. By that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to be cautious not to cross as a guest. Again, your idea that I am a guest and not a member of the community may be the source of some of your other errors in dealing with me. > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. It is absolutely my intent to remain a friend of the community even as I am also a member of the community. > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree with Marcus?s email. Then let them speak up as I have and as Marcus has. Let us hear everyone?s opinions and let the best opinions triumph in the debate and the market place of ideas. Let us not, however, focus on criticizing or denigrating each other, but instead focus on an open sharing of ideas and the constructive discussion and evaluation of the merits and disadvantages of those ideas that we might reach the best conclusion for the community and the internet as a whole. While I may not always live up to the ideal I have expressed above, it is always my intent and I try very hard to do so. > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask you do not. > > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree with everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we have no choice but to co-exist. This is one place where I absolutely agree with you, Badru. I hope you will continue forward in this way. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com Fri Jul 15 22:49:32 2016 From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston) Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 22:49:32 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Thoughts and introspection Message-ID: Hi All, Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to say, I have thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as myself, and with only my own reflections guiding what I write below. Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we have seen within AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some observations I would like to share. Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a community, as members, or anything else. But in the end, our like, or dislike of each other, is immaterial, as is even our respect for each other. What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is the best interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical part of the Internet on both the African continent and within the global context. We have to strive to apply our own individual minds to the problems faced, and the solutions required. Then, as part of this community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and in some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they will be rejected. I don't believe any of us have a perfect track record of perfect proposals, because we are all human, and humans are prone to error. The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed then need to be weighed by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of the speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not based on the geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the merits of the arguments put forward. Sadly, this is not what I am seeing in the last few years, and let me state clearly, that I am as guilty of the issue I describe here as anyone else. What I am seeing is a community that is no longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a subset of the community. I see us divided along so many different lines, and sadly, those divides are not leading to the spirited debate that will end in solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us apart. As I said, I am not placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a far wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any other here. We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view of "I'm right, and you're wrong, so everything else you say must automatically be wrong." We have gotten to the point where so often at meetings and on these lists, instead of listening to one another based on the merits of the ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from the content of the proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for the sake of attacking a person, or a collective. This makes no sense, it is deeply harmful to growth on the continent, and it is dangerous, because it creates a snowball effect that amplifiers and propagates. Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued in academia and in research, is open mindedness. Academia welcomes debate, and it is through debate that we grow, mature and learn. It is through spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, that our ideas grow and blossom. That being said, there are many forms of debate. If I examine the work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes as fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these lists. If you read http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you will see some of the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we have seen of late. As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall back to many of these types of arguments, but it is something we need to work repairing. We need to work towards a point where our arguments, our thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather than destroy. Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply amplifiers, propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day reach a point where it creates terminal injury. What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself included, started to look at each other's thoughts and ideas based entirely on the merits of the arguments. Let us follow academic principles and research the positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, understanding all the facts surrounding our positions. Then let us debate these views from a point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view that we are debating in order to find the best possible path for AfriNIC as a community and as an organisation. I strongly believe that if we, and again, I include myself, can approach things in this manner, we can all have our perspectives changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better future for this community. Please do not misunderstand my position here, I am not suggesting for one second that we cease debate, I am simply suggesting that all of us attempt to focus more on the issues at hand, rather than attacking the proposer, the collective, or anyone else. I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best for AfriNIC, I just am of the opinion that we have very different ways of approaching it. Ways that are born based on the experiences we have all had as we have moved through life. This is not to say that any one way is better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes entirely unique in nature. However, when you combine this diversity and this uniqueness you end up with a stronger whole. Let us respect each other, and as Africans, as members of this community, as interested parties, attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, and work together for what is in the best interests of the organisation and community. Let us leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and what builds, rather than what tears down. With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a hand to anyone who is willing. I am prepared to sit and engage one on one with anyone who wishes to do so, to explore their point of view, and for them to see my point of view. In the spirit of seeking common ground, so that where people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let us attempt to mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are debating the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us all. I am available on Skype, via email, or face to face if anyone wishes to engage in that manner and finds themselves in close geographic proximity to me. I believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe in life, that if you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to start somewhere. So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my actions, and my words. I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a community we can move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are mutually seeking the best for AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and each other's views. I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, because I believe that the same issues that plague our debates in one forum, spread across all three, from the policy side, through the member base, and into the wider community. I personally would welcome engagement from any member of any of those lists. Yours Sincerely Andrew Alston AfriNIC community member -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Sat Jul 16 02:45:04 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 02:45:04 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: Owen I think I understand your position, the call for calm on sensitive issues is out let's all try to uphold. The clarification on your membership is noted. I have always seen you as a guest so thank you for that. But I hope you read between the lines in my email. There are issues that are unresolved and might never be unresolved so we have to move on. When we drag those issues back as a means to defend a position like your email and Marks email you stir up the responses we see. I too noticed that I went back to those issues I had vowed to close. Which was not right for me either. So let's all find a neutral way to make out points. Once again thanks for your candid response. Regards. On 16 Jul 2016, at 12:50 am, Owen DeLong > wrote: On Jul 14, 2016, at 23:36 , Badru Ntege > wrote: Owen On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" > wrote: I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I have no desire to participate in that exercise. If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for the community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is best done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another RIR) Then the community must adjust their perspective. I work for a company which has substantial operations in the AfriNIC service region. We care very deeply about what happens and whether you like it or not, as a result, I am, in fact, a member of the community and not an outsider at this point. What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome for the region and for the internet in general. Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my track record for an education. Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. By that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to be cautious not to cross as a guest. Again, your idea that I am a guest and not a member of the community may be the source of some of your other errors in dealing with me. You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. It is absolutely my intent to remain a friend of the community even as I am also a member of the community. As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree with Marcus?s email. Then let them speak up as I have and as Marcus has. Let us hear everyone?s opinions and let the best opinions triumph in the debate and the market place of ideas. Let us not, however, focus on criticizing or denigrating each other, but instead focus on an open sharing of ideas and the constructive discussion and evaluation of the merits and disadvantages of those ideas that we might reach the best conclusion for the community and the internet as a whole. While I may not always live up to the ideal I have expressed above, it is always my intent and I try very hard to do so. To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask you do not. We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree with everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we have no choice but to co-exist. This is one place where I absolutely agree with you, Badru. I hope you will continue forward in this way. 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 noah at neo.co.tz Sat Jul 16 16:42:08 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 19:42:08 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: > [replying only on community list and members-discuss] > > > On 14 Jul 2016, at 11:29, Noah wrote: > > > > What problem are we solving? (a) When the fee structure was defined in > 2004, these once-off fees were intended to be once per allocation or > assignment, but somehow in the intervening years they were implemented > inconsistently, which was a mistake that should be corrected. (b) Some > members were paying for their requests to be evaluated, and some were not > (depending on whether they were an end user or an LIR, and depending on > whether it was their first request or a subsequent request), which was > unfair on both AFRINIC and the members who were paying. Hi Alan, So I have taken some time and In reviewing the previous fee structure, I am wondering why it was regarded as a mistake? As far as I have seen, I believe the intention was not to bill once per allocation or assignment. 1. LIR's pay annual membership fees (much more higher than end-users) and service fee within categories they get resources. The higher fees cover subsequent allocation costs and support AFRINIC mission. 2. End users (mainly corporate networks) pay a lower membership fee because they are usually not engaged with AFRINIC and benefit very little from AFRINIC's direct awareness and other programs. And End users get charged assignment fees for the resources they are use. *PS: We don't need to mix Assignments and Allocations to start with. * There is no need to charge LIRs additional money for subsequent allocations (remember LIR's do their assignment themselves and we cannot charge for that) if we keep their membership fees higher than the End-Users (because we charge End Users for additional assignments). If we create an additional allocation fee then logically we should bring all membership fees (EU and LIRs) to the same level. That would create a serious imbalance and a bigger financial problem. Mixing these two and saying the fees were inconsistently applied is misleading. The fees information was clear about this. (c) AFRINIC needs more revenue, and correcting this past mistake is a simple way of gaining a small increase in revenue. We all want more revenue for AFRINIC but not by fixing what isn?t broken at the expense of the community. > Alan Barrett > > > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Sat Jul 16 19:42:32 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 22:42:32 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: > Hi Noah, > > > > As per existing policy, there are requirements that LIR and end-users must > meet in order to be allocated new resource from AFRINIC. Staff would need > to evaluate/assess whether such new allocation request meets those > requirement. If you ask me, I would expect that those additional request > evaluation would "in most of the times" take more staff resource than first > allocation. The current fee structure ensures that such additional request > is remunerated and it doesn't matter if it's LIR or end-user at that point > as it's an additional request and would require staff resource. I don't > think there would be justification to treat the 2 broad categories > differently at that point. > Hi Seun *I see your focus is on staff rather than the rationale of the difference in fees schedules between LIR and EU and like i said, End Users pay assignment fees and low membership fees while LIR's membership fees is already high to cover such time and therefore there was no mistake being corrected here. * *PS:* And assignment is different from an allocation. *PS:* Please take time to review what other RIR are doing so that you can understand where I am coming from. So this argument of staff are over whelmed by an additional request from an existing member doesn't hold. KPI's would dictate that it's their job. An existing member would need to justify additional requirements and that is it. In fact it's easier with an existing member I would imagine. Please let us not make this about staff. That is what they are hired to do and you are making it sound like it will be the end of their world. I am sure staff would stick to "first come first serve". By the time an existing member requests for a new additional allocation, they are already operational and their business is running. So the ticket for such a request would be queued and dealt with after attending to those who came 1st obviously. > Regards > > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mirriamlauren at yahoo.com Sat Jul 16 21:47:41 2016 From: mirriamlauren at yahoo.com (Mirriam) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 21:47:41 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <977662197.364124.1468705661391.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome for the region and for the internet in general.Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my track record for an education. I actually took time to go through AFRINIC past and present and guess what. Your track record shows you claiming that AFRINIC doesn?t exist even though it had staff, a board, and meetings.?? We indeed got an education, refer to the links below! http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002065.html http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002087.html? Mirriam Chix In Tech -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Sat Jul 16 22:13:40 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 01:13:40 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: > Hello Noah, > > Hi Seun, Remember both "end site" and LIR made same payment in their first > allocation. For end site it's called assignment fee while for LIR it's > called allocation fee. > The above is not TRUE. Please visit the AFRINIC website and go through those categories and differences in fees between LIR and EU. I can assure you that the payments made by both EU and LIR are not the same during the first assignment/allocation. > > PS: Please take time to review what other RIR are doing so that you can > understand where I am coming from. > > > > SO: I don't know of any RIR that doesn't charge LIR allocation fee but > charges end site assignment fee [NB]. I will appreciate a pointer. > Where are you getting that from. Anyway please check the other RIR fees schedules, I am 100% sure you will get my point. By the way, the url's for those other RIR are publicly accessible. > > So this argument of staff are over whelmed by an additional request from > an existing member doesn't hold. KPI's would dictate that it's their job. > > > > SO: This is not me justifying my point with staff being overwhelmed, not > at all. As you rightly said, they are doing their job. My point is that > there is justification in charging assignment/allocation fee for any new > allocation since staff resource is still required just like it was in the > initial request. > What kind of justification is this. Staff are paid a monthly salary to do their job. It's like you are saying, after the initial requests, Staff now goes on vacation and cant attend to any more tickets especially the old one's who come back for more. *Allocations and assignments are done on need base, remember that.* If at all the point was for everyone to come and get enough and never come back because stuff wont be available for additional request, then we would all request what is enough and not bother coming back. Overall, my personal view is that it is either we remove charges for > allocation/assignment fee completely or we leave it as it is. > * We cant fix what is not broken. That was my point. * I do not believe it will be right to charge end-site such fee and not > charge LIR (as Noah proposed) since both involves staff resource. > They are different and they are charged differently but staff should just play their role as they have been doing all this years. The argument that they would be overwhelmed with additional reallocation requests doesn't still sound rational to me. Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Sun Jul 17 05:26:31 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 05:26:31 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Thoughts and introspection In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87A3011C-6292-4C76-B0D8-05C58B7FDADF@nftconsult.com> Members Just for the record and in the spirit of moving forward as a community I have responded to Andrew off-list copying both chair and CEO. I do believe some work needs to be done to bridge and seal the Trust cracks and fault lines we are witnessing. We all have no option but to find a respectable way for all of us to contribute to the future of AfriNIC. But you cannot sustainably do that without righting wrongs so I'm hoping we start from that point. Regards On 16 Jul 2016, at 1:50 am, Andrew Alston > wrote: Hi All, Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to say, I have thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as myself, and with only my own reflections guiding what I write below. Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we have seen within AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some observations I would like to share. Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a community, as members, or anything else. But in the end, our like, or dislike of each other, is immaterial, as is even our respect for each other. What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is the best interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical part of the Internet on both the African continent and within the global context. We have to strive to apply our own individual minds to the problems faced, and the solutions required. Then, as part of this community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and in some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they will be rejected. I don?t believe any of us have a perfect track record of perfect proposals, because we are all human, and humans are prone to error. The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed then need to be weighed by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of the speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not based on the geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the merits of the arguments put forward. Sadly, this is not what I am seeing in the last few years, and let me state clearly, that I am as guilty of the issue I describe here as anyone else. What I am seeing is a community that is no longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a subset of the community. I see us divided along so many different lines, and sadly, those divides are not leading to the spirited debate that will end in solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us apart. As I said, I am not placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a far wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any other here. We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view of ?I?m right, and you?re wrong, so everything else you say must automatically be wrong.? We have gotten to the point where so often at meetings and on these lists, instead of listening to one another based on the merits of the ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from the content of the proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for the sake of attacking a person, or a collective. This makes no sense, it is deeply harmful to growth on the continent, and it is dangerous, because it creates a snowball effect that amplifiers and propagates. Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued in academia and in research, is open mindedness. Academia welcomes debate, and it is through debate that we grow, mature and learn. It is through spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, that our ideas grow and blossom. That being said, there are many forms of debate. If I examine the work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes as fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these lists. If you read http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you will see some of the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we have seen of late. As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall back to many of these types of arguments, but it is something we need to work repairing. We need to work towards a point where our arguments, our thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather than destroy. Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply amplifiers, propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day reach a point where it creates terminal injury. What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself included, started to look at each other?s thoughts and ideas based entirely on the merits of the arguments. Let us follow academic principles and research the positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, understanding all the facts surrounding our positions. Then let us debate these views from a point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view that we are debating in order to find the best possible path for AfriNIC as a community and as an organisation. I strongly believe that if we, and again, I include myself, can approach things in this manner, we can all have our perspectives changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better future for this community. Please do not misunderstand my position here, I am not suggesting for one second that we cease debate, I am simply suggesting that all of us attempt to focus more on the issues at hand, rather than attacking the proposer, the collective, or anyone else. I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best for AfriNIC, I just am of the opinion that we have very different ways of approaching it. Ways that are born based on the experiences we have all had as we have moved through life. This is not to say that any one way is better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes entirely unique in nature. However, when you combine this diversity and this uniqueness you end up with a stronger whole. Let us respect each other, and as Africans, as members of this community, as interested parties, attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, and work together for what is in the best interests of the organisation and community. Let us leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and what builds, rather than what tears down. With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a hand to anyone who is willing. I am prepared to sit and engage one on one with anyone who wishes to do so, to explore their point of view, and for them to see my point of view. In the spirit of seeking common ground, so that where people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let us attempt to mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are debating the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us all. I am available on Skype, via email, or face to face if anyone wishes to engage in that manner and finds themselves in close geographic proximity to me. I believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe in life, that if you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to start somewhere. So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my actions, and my words. I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a community we can move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are mutually seeking the best for AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and each other?s views. I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, because I believe that the same issues that plague our debates in one forum, spread across all three, from the policy side, through the member base, and into the wider community. I personally would welcome engagement from any member of any of those lists. Yours Sincerely Andrew Alston AfriNIC community member _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Jul 17 05:42:58 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 22:42:58 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: <977662197.364124.1468705661391.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> References: <977662197.364124.1468705661391.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 16, 2016, at 14:47 , Mirriam wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: > People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome for the region and for the internet in general. > Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my track record for an education. > > > I actually took time to go through AFRINIC past and present and guess what. > > Your track record shows you claiming that AFRINIC doesn?t exist even though it had staff, a board, and meetings. > > We indeed got an education, refer to the links below! > > http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002065.html > http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002087.html > > Mirriam > > Chix In Tech > > I didn?t claim it didn?t exist, I referred to it as ?vaporware? which is a term often applied to a product or service which may exist in a laboratory, but isn?t available for purchase at the time, which was exactly where AfriNIC services were at the time I wrote those posts. I will admit that the word may have been inflammatory and possibly poorly chosen. I have learned in the last 13 years. Who among us has not? Note that those are from 2003, over 13 years ago. A lot has changed in that time, and, in fact, if you follow the thread through to the conclusion of the policy development process, you will see that Adiel and I ended up supporting each other?s proposals and resolving a number of issues for both communities. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From muyiwacaleb at gmail.com Sun Jul 17 09:39:02 2016 From: muyiwacaleb at gmail.com (caleb olumuyiwa) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 10:39:02 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Community-Discuss Digest, Vol 33, Issue 1 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Community Members, I salute everyone's brave and honest opinion. I share some concerns of members as well, while I also give credit to the last post by Andrew. While some of us are young in the community and also tap from the wealth of experience from folks through the posts and comments made on this mailing list, I want to humbly suggest that we consider some interesting opinion shared by Andrew. (Even when I don't agree with some of his opinion shared during some other debates). I also feel that since the Board Chair has commented on the issue at hand with a documented resolve to do the job we elected them to do, we might as well wish to give them a timeline to get back to the community so as to lay the matter to rest. Let us not forget that constructive and diverse debates help us to be strong as a community and as a region. The younger folks in the community like myself are looking up to concerned quick resolution of pending issues while we welcome more constructive debates, proposals and consensus. I also pray God give the board wisdom to take the best decision that the whole community will accept and support. Caleb Ogundele University of Ibadan, Distance Learning Centre. On Jul 16, 2016 1:00 PM, wrote: > 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: Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees (Badru Ntege) > 2. Re: AFRINIC Council of Elders (Benjamin Eshun) > 3. Re: AFRINIC Council of Elders (MBJ) > 4. Re: Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees (Boubakar Barry) > 5. Re: AFRINIC Council of Elders (Noah) > 6. Re: Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees (Jackson Muthili) > 7. Re: Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees (Owen DeLong) > 8. Thoughts and introspection (Andrew Alston) > 9. Re: Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees (Badru Ntege) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:36:46 +0300 > From: Badru Ntege > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Cc: AfriNIC Discuss > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up > fees > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Owen > > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my > best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that > you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I > have no desire to participate in that exercise. > > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for > the community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is > best done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on > outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. > (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another > RIR) > > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an > agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on > the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the > establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but > perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. > > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. > By that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to > be cautious not to cross as a guest. > > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue > the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. > > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under > discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree > with Marcus?s email. > > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask > you do not. > > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree with > everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we have > no choice but to co-exist. > > Regards > > Badru > > > > > > > Owen > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160715/2a0cdbbc/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:59:09 +0000 > From: Benjamin Eshun > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > Message-ID: <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Dear Alan, > > What secrets do we have to hide about how AfriNIC is governed? Why not > provide the minutes without redaction so if it resolves this festering > matter once and for all? > > It does not makes sense to me and it is clear that there is something to > hide. The board is not able to tell the community what transpired and > points fingers at those who would inform us. > > I would appreciate it better if the organisation was a private company or > had some information that was of some trade secret value. But AfriNIC is > basically a monopoly in the region and cannot have competition from any of > the other RIRs. > > I'm beginning to see signs of elected officers of a community that > unilaterally take decisions and actions without due recourse to the > membership that put them there in the first place. > > This truly saddens me. Afrinic board meetings should be public. > > Benjamin > > > On Jul 15, 2016, at 5:26 AM, Alan Barrett > wrote: > > > > On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun > wrote: > > > > Chair Sunday, > > > > When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings > as it being after a 1 year, the > > minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can expect > it. > > Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed > to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before > publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, > the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned > to be published) is ongoing. I expect it to be done by the end of 2016. > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160715/a3caf282/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:22:20 +0100 > From: "MBJ" > To: "'General Discussions of AFRINIC'" > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > Message-ID: <044b01d1deac$adf79480$09e6bd80$@tn> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Dear Alan, > One year and two years to write minutes is toooooo much. > Please close this discussion by providing the minutes ASAP. > Thanks > Mustapha > > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Alan Barrett [mailto:alan.barrett at afrinic.net] > Envoy? : vendredi 15 juillet 2016 10:20 > ? : General Discussions of AFRINIC > Objet : Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > > > > On 15 Jul 2016, at 11:21, Jackson Muthili > wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 8:26 AM, Alan Barrett > wrote: > >> > >> Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has > committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before > publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, > the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned > to be published) is ongoing. > > > > What is the generally agreed practice around redacting some > > information in minutes when there are some persons affected by that > > redacted information amid a dispute? > > At the time that the meetings in question were held (2014 and 2015), the > participants in the meetings expected the minutes to be kept confidential. > Subsequently, the Board agreed to publish redacted versions of the > minutes. Redaction must be done carefully to preserve the confidentiality > of sensitive parts of the discussions, while publishing parts that are not > sensitive. > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:09:49 +0000 > From: Boubakar Barry > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Cc: AfriNIC Discuss > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up > fees > Message-ID: > Jnk5bgB9Mrw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Dear All, > > I think that what is going on is quite disgusting and not good for AfriNIC. > > Permit me to to especially address Owen Delong's behaviour. If he can't > help us solving our problems, he shouldn't add more to them. > > Every responsible person who is an observer in any organisation such as > AfriNIC, whatever the openness and inclusiveness are, would reasonably > refrain him/herself from intervening in sensitive internal issues, > especially when it's about governance. > > I personally have now the impression that AfriNIC Board and Secretariat > don't exist and/or have outsourced their communication to address issues of > members and the community at large. Or some people have given themselves > this power and role. This is far from being good for AfriNIC and its > leadership. > > If Mr. Delong's objective is to support AfriNIC, it would be good for him > to think carefully about when and where to intervene and avoid interfering > too much in AfriNIC internal issues, as many other observers are wisely > doing. > > Boubakar > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160715/54b64bba/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 19:12:23 +0300 > From: Noah > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders > Message-ID: > CktHPoiZeAewDxd+AeHTBwNx8qDeXTn3J5XdA at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > On 15 Jul 2016 18:24, "MBJ" wrote: > > > > Dear Alan, > > One year and two years to write minutes is toooooo much. > > Actually those minutes were to be published last year in August. > > Had they been published, we woudnt find ourselves in this Fiasco... > > > Thanks > > Mustapha > > > > Noah > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160715/859ed4fa/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 19:47:50 +0300 > From: Jackson Muthili > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Cc: AfriNIC Discuss > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up > fees > Message-ID: > < > CA+DdLrQCaKMJmm+sS-SVmL7ceNfcOvgWMosonaym2thZvZNAow at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > I don't think anyone can restrict anyone on what to say or not say on > a public mailing list that does not make distinction between official > list members and observers. > > AfriNIC meetings too are open to anyone and whoever attends is free to > comment about any observations on appropriate platform. It is > completely unreasonable to expect a person from another RIR community > to not talk freely and be called an outsider. > > Stick to issues. > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Badru Ntege > wrote: > > Owen > > > > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" wrote: > > > > > > I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my > > best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that > > you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I > have > > no desire to participate in that exercise. > > > > > > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for > the > > community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is > best > > done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on > > outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. > > (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another > > RIR) > > > > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an > > agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on > > the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the > > establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but > > perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. > > > > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. > By > > that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to be > > cautious not to cross as a guest. > > > > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue > > the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. > > > > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under > > discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently > agree > > with Marcus?s email. > > > > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask > > you do not. > > > > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree > with > > everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we > have no > > choice but to co-exist. > > > > Regards > > > > Badru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Owen > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 14:48:58 -0700 > From: Owen DeLong > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Cc: AfriNIC Discuss > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up > fees > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > > > On Jul 14, 2016, at 23:36 , Badru Ntege > wrote: > > > > Owen > > > > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" owen at delong.com>> wrote: > > > >> > >> I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried > my best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now > that you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and > I have no desire to participate in that exercise. > > > > > > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for > the community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is > best done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on > outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. > (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another > RIR) > > Then the community must adjust their perspective. I work for a company > which has substantial operations in the AfriNIC service region. We care > very deeply about what happens and whether you like it or not, as a result, > I am, in fact, a member of the community and not an outsider at this point. > > > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an > agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on > the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the > establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but > perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. > > People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My > agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome > for the region and for the internet in general. > > Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the > establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my > track record for an education. > > > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. > By that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to > be cautious not to cross as a guest. > > Again, your idea that I am a guest and not a member of the community may > be the source of some of your other errors in dealing with me. > > > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you > continue the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. > > It is absolutely my intent to remain a friend of the community even as I > am also a member of the community. > > > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under > discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree > with Marcus?s email. > > Then let them speak up as I have and as Marcus has. Let us hear everyone?s > opinions and let the best opinions triumph in the debate and the market > place of ideas. Let us not, however, focus on criticizing or denigrating > each other, but instead focus on an open sharing of ideas and the > constructive discussion and evaluation of the merits and disadvantages of > those ideas that we might reach the best conclusion for the community and > the internet as a whole. > > While I may not always live up to the ideal I have expressed above, it is > always my intent and I try very hard to do so. > > > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I > ask you do not. > > > > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree > with everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we > have no choice but to co-exist. > > This is one place where I absolutely agree with you, Badru. I hope you > will continue forward in this way. > > Owen > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160715/7d5d5c85/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 22:49:32 +0000 > From: Andrew Alston > To: rpd List , "members-discuss at afrinic.net" > , General Discussions of AFRINIC > > Subject: [Community-Discuss] Thoughts and introspection > Message-ID: > < > AMSPR03MB5343BE5D3A26BAE15E974E9EE330 at AMSPR03MB534.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > Hi All, > > Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to > say, I have thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as > myself, and with only my own reflections guiding what I write below. > > Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we > have seen within AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some > observations I would like to share. > > Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a > community, as members, or anything else. But in the end, our like, or > dislike of each other, is immaterial, as is even our respect for each > other. What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is the best > interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical > part of the Internet on both the African continent and within the global > context. We have to strive to apply our own individual minds to the > problems faced, and the solutions required. Then, as part of this > community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and > in some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they > will be rejected. I don't believe any of us have a perfect track record of > perfect proposals, because we are all human, and humans are prone to > error. The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed then need to be > weighed by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of > the speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not > based on the geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the > merits of the arguments put forward. Sadly, this is not what I am seeing > in the last few years, and let me state clearly, that I am as guilty of the > issue I describe here as anyone else. What I am seeing is a community that > is no longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a > subset of the community. I see us divided along so many different lines, > and sadly, those divides are not leading to the spirited debate that will > end in solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us apart. As I said, I > am not placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a > far wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any > other here. > > We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view > of "I'm right, and you're wrong, so everything else you say must > automatically be wrong." We have gotten to the point where so often at > meetings and on these lists, instead of listening to one another based on > the merits of the ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from > the content of the proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for > the sake of attacking a person, or a collective. This makes no sense, it > is deeply harmful to growth on the continent, and it is dangerous, because > it creates a snowball effect that amplifiers and propagates. > > Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued > in academia and in research, is open mindedness. Academia welcomes debate, > and it is through debate that we grow, mature and learn. It is through > spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, that our ideas grow and > blossom. That being said, there are many forms of debate. If I examine > the work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes > as fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these > lists. If you read > http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you > will see some of the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we > have seen of late. > > As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall > back to many of these types of arguments, but it is something we need to > work repairing. We need to work towards a point where our arguments, our > thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather than destroy. > Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply > amplifiers, propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day > reach a point where it creates terminal injury. > > What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself > included, started to look at each other's thoughts and ideas based entirely > on the merits of the arguments. Let us follow academic principles and > research the positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, > understanding all the facts surrounding our positions. Then let us debate > these views from a point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view > that we are debating in order to find the best possible path for AfriNIC as > a community and as an organisation. I strongly believe that if we, and > again, I include myself, can approach things in this manner, we can all > have our perspectives changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better > future for this community. Please do not misunderstand my position here, I > am not suggesting for one second that we cease debate, I am simply > suggesting that all of us attempt to focus more on the issues at hand, > rather than attacking the proposer, the collective, or anyone else. > > I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best > for AfriNIC, I just am of the opinion that we have very different ways of > approaching it. Ways that are born based on the experiences we have all > had as we have moved through life. This is not to say that any one way is > better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes > entirely unique in nature. However, when you combine this diversity and > this uniqueness you end up with a stronger whole. Let us respect each > other, and as Africans, as members of this community, as interested > parties, attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, and work > together for what is in the best interests of the organisation and > community. Let us leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and > what builds, rather than what tears down. > > With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a > hand to anyone who is willing. I am prepared to sit and engage one on one > with anyone who wishes to do so, to explore their point of view, and for > them to see my point of view. In the spirit of seeking common ground, so > that where people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let us > attempt to mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are > debating the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us > all. I am available on Skype, via email, or face to face if anyone wishes > to engage in that manner and finds themselves in close geographic proximity > to me. I believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe in > life, that if you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to > start somewhere. So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my > actions, and my words. > > I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a > community we can move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are > mutually seeking the best for AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and > each other's views. > > I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, > because I believe that the same issues that plague our debates in one > forum, spread across all three, from the policy side, through the member > base, and into the wider community. I personally would welcome engagement > from any member of any of those lists. > > Yours Sincerely > > Andrew Alston > AfriNIC community member > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160715/5098b9f5/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 02:45:04 +0000 > From: Badru Ntege > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > Cc: AfriNIC Discuss > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up > fees > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Owen > > I think I understand your position, the call for calm on sensitive issues > is out let's all try to uphold. > > The clarification on your membership is noted. I have always seen you as a > guest so thank you for that. > > But I hope you read between the lines in my email. > > There are issues that are unresolved and might never be unresolved so we > have to move on. When we drag those issues back as a means to defend a > position like your email and Marks email you stir up the responses we see. > I too noticed that I went back to those issues I had vowed to close. Which > was not right for me either. > > So let's all find a neutral way to make out points. > > Once again thanks for your candid response. > > Regards. > > > > On 16 Jul 2016, at 12:50 am, Owen DeLong owen at delong.com>> wrote: > > > On Jul 14, 2016, at 23:36 , Badru Ntege > wrote: > > Owen > > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" > > wrote: > > > I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried my > best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now that > you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I > have no desire to participate in that exercise. > > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for > the community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is > best done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on > outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. > (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from another > RIR) > > Then the community must adjust their perspective. I work for a company > which has substantial operations in the AfriNIC service region. We care > very deeply about what happens and whether you like it or not, as a result, > I am, in fact, a member of the community and not an outsider at this point. > > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an > agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on > the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the > establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but > perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. > > People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My > agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome > for the region and for the internet in general. > > Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the > establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my > track record for an education. > > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. > By that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to > be cautious not to cross as a guest. > > Again, your idea that I am a guest and not a member of the community may > be the source of some of your other errors in dealing with me. > > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you continue > the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. > > It is absolutely my intent to remain a friend of the community even as I > am also a member of the community. > > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under > discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently agree > with Marcus?s email. > > Then let them speak up as I have and as Marcus has. Let us hear everyone?s > opinions and let the best opinions triumph in the debate and the market > place of ideas. Let us not, however, focus on criticizing or denigrating > each other, but instead focus on an open sharing of ideas and the > constructive discussion and evaluation of the merits and disadvantages of > those ideas that we might reach the best conclusion for the community and > the internet as a whole. > > While I may not always live up to the ideal I have expressed above, it is > always my intent and I try very hard to do so. > > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I ask > you do not. > > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree with > everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we have > no choice but to co-exist. > > This is one place where I absolutely agree with you, Badru. I hope you > will continue forward in this way. > > 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: < > https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20160716/00e59d2d/attachment-0001.html > > > > ------------------------------ > > 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 33, Issue 1 > ************************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From madomey at hotmail.com Sun Jul 17 13:03:11 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 13:03:11 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: , <977662197.364124.1468705661391.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com>, Message-ID: Dear Owen, Two things are clear to me. History is the best teacher but we should not let it repeat itself when it is not positiveIt is evident that some visionaries took same AfriNIC from the days you misleadingly claimed it was vaporware to what it is today or we would not be having these discussions. We MUST show respect for them and acknowledge their efforts. Many things may have changed since 2003 but people generally don't change their core beliefs and I doubt that your motivation then is much different from now. Nevertheless, for the sake of the AfriNIC these folks worked hard for and you are now happy to belong to, let us focus on issues, for instance, the fees, and the issue of the minutes that is taking one to two years to produce. Thank you, Marcus From: owen at delong.com Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 22:42:58 -0700 To: mirriamlauren at yahoo.com CC: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees On Jul 16, 2016, at 14:47 , Mirriam wrote: On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Owen DeLong wrote:People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome for the region and for the internet in general.Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my track record for an education.I actually took time to go through AFRINIC past and present and guess what.Your track record shows you claiming that AFRINIC doesn?t exist even though it had staff, a board, and meetings. We indeed got an education, refer to the links below!http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002065.htmlhttp://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002087.html MirriamChix In Tech I didn?t claim it didn?t exist, I referred to it as ?vaporware? which is a term often applied to a product or service which may exist in a laboratory, but isn?t available for purchase at the time, which was exactly where AfriNIC services were at the time I wrote those posts. I will admit that the word may have been inflammatory and possibly poorly chosen. I have learned in the last 13 years. Who among us has not? Note that those are from 2003, over 13 years ago. A lot has changed in that time, and, in fact, if you follow the thread through to the conclusion of the policy development process, you will see that Adiel and I ended up supporting each other?s proposals and resolving a number of issues for both communities. 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 owen at delong.com Sun Jul 17 18:50:49 2016 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2016 11:50:49 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <977662197.364124.1468705661391.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > On Jul 17, 2016, at 06:03 , Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > > Dear Owen, > > Two things are clear to me. > > History is the best teacher but we should not let it repeat itself when it is not positive This may well be true, however, it can only teach well if the student studies all the details. It is very easy to learn a completely incorrect lesson if one ignores important pieces. > It is evident that some visionaries took same AfriNIC from the days you misleadingly claimed it was vaporware to what it is today or we would not be having these discussions. We MUST show respect for them and acknowledge their efforts. I would not say it was misleading. It was an accurate description of the current state of AfriNIC services at the time. Nonetheless, it was an ill-chosen set of words and was inflammatory. > Many things may have changed since 2003 but people generally don't change their core beliefs and I doubt that your motivation then is much different from now. You are correct that my motivation today remains the same as it was then, but I don?t think you necessarily have an accurate picture of that motivation. You see, My motivation now, as it was then, was to seek the best outcome for the internet and the number resource community overall. At the time, my perspective was skewed by the fact that we had a proposal to grant an exceptional change in policy for only one part of the ARIN region when I felt that all of the ARIN region needed this policy change. If you read through the thread in any detail, you will see that my consistent argument was that we should not be creating a separate policy regime for what was at the time one fraction of the ARIN region while leaving the rest of the ARIN region saddled with the policy as it existed at the time. At the beginning of that discussion, Adiel and I each had our perception problems. Over time, we resolved them and came to be friends and both supported each other in getting the necessary policy change made for all of the ARIN region instead of just the African portion. My perception was that a small contingent of people from Africa were focused on getting what they wanted without regard for the needs of the community as a whole. Adiel?s perception was that the policy change was not needed by ISPs in other parts of the region. Once Adiel understood that the policy change he was proposing would have greater benefit if it applied to the entire region and that there was, in fact, need for it in the rest of the region, he came to better understand my argument. Likewise, once I understood that the disregard for the need in the rest of the community was not malicious, but based on a perceptual error and a concern for unnecessary opposition, I came to better understand his argument. At no point was I opposed to ARIN providing the needed resources to members of the African community. My concern was that if a policy providing relief only for Africa was passed, we might have much greater difficulty getting that same needed relief for the rest of the ARIN region. As it turned out, we were able to pass a policy which provided relief for the entire region. > Nevertheless, for the sake of the AfriNIC these folks worked hard for and you are now happy to belong to, let us focus on issues, for instance, the fees, and the issue of the minutes that is taking one to two years to produce. The reason for delay in publishing the minutes has been explained repeatedly and progress is continuing. I did not bring up the 2003 postings, Mirriam chose to do that. I responded strictly for the purpose of clarifying rather than let the implications from a carefully chosen set of messages taken out of context stand. It was, indeed, lessons I learned from that proceeding that led me to choose AfriNIC as the first RIR meeting that I attended as a member of the AC once I was elected to the ARIN AC. Since then, I have attended many AfriNIC meetings and have been an active participant in AfriNIC proceedings. Say what you will about my choice of words or my communication style. Feel free to disagree with me or criticize my ideas. However, have no doubt whatsoever that my motivation is and always has been the good of the internet and the community. Owen > > Thank you, > > > > Marcus > > > > From: owen at delong.com > Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 22:42:58 -0700 > To: mirriamlauren at yahoo.com > CC: community-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees > > > On Jul 16, 2016, at 14:47 , Mirriam > wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 12:48 AM, Owen DeLong > wrote: > People will, of course, have their perspectives and their agendas. My agenda here is plain and I have stated it. I want to see the best outcome for the region and for the internet in general. > Anyone who believes I have a different agenda or would defend the establishment if I felt that the establishment was wrong should review my track record for an education. > > > I actually took time to go through AFRINIC past and present and guess what. > > Your track record shows you claiming that AFRINIC doesn?t exist even though it had staff, a board, and meetings. > > We indeed got an education, refer to the links below! > > http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002065.html > http://lists.arin.net/ pipermail/arin-ppml/2003- September/002087.html > > Mirriam > > Chix In Tech > > > > I didn?t claim it didn?t exist, I referred to it as ?vaporware? which is a term often applied to a product or service which may exist in a laboratory, but isn?t available for purchase at the time, which was exactly where AfriNIC services were at the time I wrote those posts. > > I will admit that the word may have been inflammatory and possibly poorly chosen. I have learned in the last 13 years. Who among us has not? > > Note that those are from 2003, over 13 years ago. > > A lot has changed in that time, and, in fact, if you follow the thread through to the conclusion of the policy development process, you will see that Adiel and I ended up supporting each other?s proposals and resolving a number of issues for both communities. > > 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 noah at neo.co.tz Sat Jul 16 19:26:26 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 22:26:26 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Jul 16, 2016 at 8:30 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: > Hi Noah, > > > > As per existing policy, there are requirements that LIR and end-users must > meet in order to be allocated new resource from AFRINIC. Staff would need > to evaluate/assess whether such new allocation request meets those > requirement. If you ask me, I would expect that those additional request > evaluation would "in most of the times" take more staff resource than first > allocation. The current fee structure ensures that such additional request > is remunerated and it doesn't matter if it's LIR or end-user at that point > as it's an additional request and would require staff resource. I don't > think there would be justification to treat the 2 broad categories > differently at that point. > Hi Seun *I see your focus is on staff rather than the rationale of the difference in fees schedules between LIR and EU and like i said, End Users pay assignment fees and low membership fees while LIR's membership fees is already high to cover such time and therefore there was no mistake being corrected here. * *PS:* And assignment is different from an allocation. *PS:* Please take time to review what other RIR are doing so that you can understand where I am coming from. So this argument of staff are over whelmed by an additional request from an existing member doesn't hold. KPI's would dictate that it's their job. An existing member would need to justify additional requirements and that is it. In fact it's easier with an existing member I would imagine. Please let us not make this about staff. That is what they are hired to do and you are making it sound like it will be the end of their world. I am sure staff would stick to "first come first serve". By the time an existing member requests for a new additional allocation, they are already operational and their business is running. So the ticket for such a request would be queued and dealt with after attending to those who came 1st obviously. Regards > > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From otieno.barrack at gmail.com Mon Jul 18 04:34:22 2016 From: otieno.barrack at gmail.com (Barrack Otieno) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 07:34:22 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Thoughts and introspection In-Reply-To: <87A3011C-6292-4C76-B0D8-05C58B7FDADF@nftconsult.com> References: <87A3011C-6292-4C76-B0D8-05C58B7FDADF@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: Hi Badru, hi all That is a good move in addition i see an opportunity for AfriNIC to encourage its members and community to participate in the Diplomacy training programmes offered by Diplo Foundation or AFRISIG, i find them very usefull in enhancing how we engage and arriving at win win scenario's, none the less we should embrace the correct spirit which is putting the interests of the organization first. The spirit gives life but the letter kills, if we focus too much on by laws which are meant to be a guide (the letter) we will continue fanning mistrust but if we are put people, their opinions first, we will breed synergy. Simple wisdom states that people are meant to be appreciated, things are meant to be used, we should never mix the two objectives. En Avance On 7/17/16, Badru Ntege wrote: > Members > > Just for the record and in the spirit of moving forward as a community I > have responded to Andrew off-list copying both chair and CEO. > > I do believe some work needs to be done to bridge and seal the Trust cracks > and fault lines we are witnessing. > > We all have no option but to find a respectable way for all of us to > contribute to the future of AfriNIC. > > But you cannot sustainably do that without righting wrongs so I'm hoping we > start from that point. > > Regards > > > On 16 Jul 2016, at 1:50 am, Andrew Alston > > > wrote: > > Hi All, > > Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to > say, I have thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as > myself, and with only my own reflections guiding what I write below. > > Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we have > seen within AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some observations I > would like to share. > > Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a > community, as members, or anything else. But in the end, our like, or > dislike of each other, is immaterial, as is even our respect for each other. > What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is the best > interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical > part of the Internet on both the African continent and within the global > context. We have to strive to apply our own individual minds to the > problems faced, and the solutions required. Then, as part of this > community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and in > some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they will > be rejected. I don?t believe any of us have a perfect track record of > perfect proposals, because we are all human, and humans are prone to error. > The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed then need to be weighed > by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of the > speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not based on > the geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the merits of > the arguments put forward. Sadly, this is not what I am seeing in the last > few years, and let me state clearly, that I am as guilty of the issue I > describe here as anyone else. What I am seeing is a community that is no > longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a subset of > the community. I see us divided along so many different lines, and sadly, > those divides are not leading to the spirited debate that will end in > solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us apart. As I said, I am not > placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a far > wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any other > here. > > We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view of > ?I?m right, and you?re wrong, so everything else you say must automatically > be wrong.? We have gotten to the point where so often at meetings and on > these lists, instead of listening to one another based on the merits of the > ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from the content of the > proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for the sake of attacking > a person, or a collective. This makes no sense, it is deeply harmful to > growth on the continent, and it is dangerous, because it creates a snowball > effect that amplifiers and propagates. > > Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued in > academia and in research, is open mindedness. Academia welcomes debate, and > it is through debate that we grow, mature and learn. It is through > spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, that our ideas grow and > blossom. That being said, there are many forms of debate. If I examine the > work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes as > fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these > lists. If you read > http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you will > see some of the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we have > seen of late. > > As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall back > to many of these types of arguments, but it is something we need to work > repairing. We need to work towards a point where our arguments, our > thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather than destroy. > Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply > amplifiers, propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day > reach a point where it creates terminal injury. > > What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself included, > started to look at each other?s thoughts and ideas based entirely on the > merits of the arguments. Let us follow academic principles and research the > positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, understanding all the > facts surrounding our positions. Then let us debate these views from a > point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view that we are debating in > order to find the best possible path for AfriNIC as a community and as an > organisation. I strongly believe that if we, and again, I include myself, > can approach things in this manner, we can all have our perspectives > changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better future for this community. > Please do not misunderstand my position here, I am not suggesting for one > second that we cease debate, I am simply suggesting that all of us attempt > to focus more on the issues at hand, rather than attacking the proposer, the > collective, or anyone else. > > I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best for > AfriNIC, I just am of the opinion that we have very different ways of > approaching it. Ways that are born based on the experiences we have all had > as we have moved through life. This is not to say that any one way is > better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes > entirely unique in nature. However, when you combine this diversity and > this uniqueness you end up with a stronger whole. Let us respect each > other, and as Africans, as members of this community, as interested parties, > attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, and work together > for what is in the best interests of the organisation and community. Let us > leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and what builds, rather > than what tears down. > > With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a hand > to anyone who is willing. I am prepared to sit and engage one on one with > anyone who wishes to do so, to explore their point of view, and for them to > see my point of view. In the spirit of seeking common ground, so that where > people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let us attempt to > mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are debating > the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us all. I > am available on Skype, via email, or face to face if anyone wishes to engage > in that manner and finds themselves in close geographic proximity to me. I > believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe in life, that if > you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to start somewhere. > So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my actions, and my > words. > > I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a > community we can move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are > mutually seeking the best for AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and each > other?s views. > > I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, > because I believe that the same issues that plague our debates in one forum, > spread across all three, from the policy side, through the member base, and > into the wider community. I personally would welcome engagement from any > member of any of those lists. > > Yours Sincerely > > Andrew Alston > AfriNIC community member > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > -- Barrack O. Otieno +254721325277 +254733206359 Skype: barrack.otieno PGP ID: 0x2611D86A From jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Mon Jul 18 06:55:03 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:55:03 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 11:52 PM, Marcus K. G. Adomey wrote: > Dear Jackson, > > If you have nothing consistent to say PLEASE, shut up. Marcus let us please learn to respect and tolerate each others views much as they may differ. Asking someone to shut up just because their ideas and yours don't align is, in my mind, petty and na?ve. > Marcus > > >> From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com >> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 19:47:50 +0300 >> To: community-discuss at afrinic.net >> CC: members-discuss at afrinic.net >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees >> >> I don't think anyone can restrict anyone on what to say or not say on >> a public mailing list that does not make distinction between official >> list members and observers. >> >> AfriNIC meetings too are open to anyone and whoever attends is free to >> comment about any observations on appropriate platform. It is >> completely unreasonable to expect a person from another RIR community >> to not talk freely and be called an outsider. >> >> Stick to issues. >> >> On Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 9:36 AM, Badru Ntege >> wrote: >> > Owen >> > >> > On 7/15/16, 6:47 AM, "Owen DeLong" wrote: >> > >> > >> > I?m done adding noise to the list and feeding the trolls. I have tried >> > my >> > best to work for a peaceful resolution, but it seems clear to me now >> > that >> > you do not seek information, but rather seek to foment discontent and I >> > have >> > no desire to participate in that exercise. >> > >> > >> > If you mean the above it might be the most helpful act you have done for >> > the >> > community. There are issues the community needs to resolve and this is >> > best >> > done by themselves. With all due respect the community sees you as on >> > outsider and as wrong as this might be in RIR eco system that?s just it. >> > (before anyone reads anything out of this statement it means from >> > another >> > RIR) >> > >> > What might seem factual to you will be seem as a statement pursuing an >> > agenda. Just like every time I post something it is seem as an attack on >> > the establishment, your posts are also seen as a defense on the >> > establishment. I?m sure most of the time it's not your intent but >> > perceptions and paradigms are hard to change at times. >> > >> > Of recent I also think you crossed the line in some of your statements. >> > By >> > that in our culture you are a guest and there?s a line that one has to >> > be >> > cautious not to cross as a guest. >> > >> > You have been a long time friend of the community and I urge you >> > continue >> > the friendship when it comes to the technical value you bring. >> > >> > As tempting as it might be when you add your opinion to a topic under >> > discussion it seems to spin out of control and I?m sure many silently >> > agree >> > with Marcus?s email. >> > >> > To those who might be tempted to spin this email into anything else I >> > ask >> > you do not. >> > >> > We need to move forward and build our community. We will never agree >> > with >> > everyone and that is why we seek consensus or go for the vote but we >> > have no >> > choice but to co-exist. >> > >> > Regards >> > >> > Badru >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > 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 From mirriamlauren at yahoo.com Mon Jul 18 09:31:48 2016 From: mirriamlauren at yahoo.com (Mirriam) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Community-Discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <977662197.364124.1468705661391.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <295196346.916307.1468834308762.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> On Sunday, July 17, 2016 8:44 AM, Owen DeLong wrote: >I didn?t claim it didn?t exist, I referred to it as ?vaporware? which is a term often applied to a product or service >which may exist in a laboratory, but isn?t available for purchase at the time, which was exactly where AfriNIC >services were at the time I wrote those posts. >I will admit that the word may have been inflammatory and possibly poorly chosen. I have learned in the last 13?>years. Who among us has not? Owen, Well, ?In the computer industry, vaporware (also spelled vapourware) is a product, typically computer hardware or software, that is announced to the general public but is never actually manufactured nor officially cancelled.? - Wikipedia AFRINIC had staff, staff, a board and meetings so was real and not just an announcement.? And it is still here today.?? Your reference to AfriNIC as vapourware was not only inflammatory, it was misleading in support of your argument at the time but we shall continue to move on as we did then. MirriamChix in Tech -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com Mon Jul 18 12:41:24 2016 From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:41:24 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] [members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection In-Reply-To: <578CCB7D.19558.36BB5406@paulos.sdnp.org.mw> References: , , <578CCB7D.19558.36BB5406@paulos.sdnp.org.mw> Message-ID: Hi Paulos, Just for clarification purposes. Before sending the email to the community, there was also request for direct engagement sort with several individuals. I will continue to seek direct engagement where possible, however, the offer to engage is still there for the whole community, and I am hoping that beyond just the engagement I am inviting, that others will also read the contents of the email, and choose to have their own one on one engagements between themselves and others they have conflict with. Let us not make this about specific people, this is about how the community as a whole engages with each other, both one on one, and in groups and based on all the divisions I referred to in my mail. Fixing the position I see us in now, will never be solved by one individual, it will take a collective effort between numerous parties. Andrew From: Dr Paulos B Nyirenda [mailto:paulos at sdnp.org.mw] Sent: 18 July 2016 15:29 To: rpd List ; members-discuss at afrinic.net; community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [rpd] [members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection For me the long e-mail from Andrew helped but raised more questions on what it was all about. Honestly, it looks to me like and reads like a "Bernie Sanders speech presented in the presence of Hilarly Clinton without mentioning Hilarly" in these weeks that we are in now :-) I would have liked to see a more specific submission with events and people or groups which have generated this introspection. I do not believe that there will be any healing without specifics. It is good that Badru has stepped forward and I hope the results of that will come out in the open. However, I find it difficult to believe that an open invitation for others to get in touch with Andrew will yield the expected community healing that is being talked about in the e-mail. Hence, it is my hope that Andrew will reach out to specific individuals and/or groups that he has in mind on this e-mailed introspection and process ... whatever ... instead of him just sitting back and waiting for or expecting peopleo groups to reach out to him. He has made a good start but needs to go the extra mile. Regards, Paulos ====================== Dr Paulos B Nyirenda NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD http://www.registrar.mw On 16 Jul 2016 at 8:23, Andrew Alston wrote: > Thank you Hytham for your response, > > I look forward to further engagement with you as always. > > Andrew > > Get Outlook for iOS > > _____________________________ > From: Haitham Nakhal > > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 10:16 > Subject: Re: FW: Thoughts and introspection > To: Andrew Alston >, > > > > Dear Andrew, > > "I'm writing here as an Afrinic member" > > Thank you for your positive email and thanks for your moral courage to confess that you > were guilty in sometimes and took the initiative to clear the air and moving forward and > positively for the sake of Afrinic organization and members. > > Best Regrads, > Haitham El Nakhal > ________________________________ > From: Andrew Alston > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 12:49:32 AM (UTC+02:00) Cairo > To: rpd List; members-discuss at afrinic.net; General Discussions of AFRINIC > Subject: [SUSPECT][members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection > > Hi All, > > Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to say, I have > thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as myself, and with only my own > reflections guiding what I write below. > > Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we have seen within > AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some observations I would like to share. > > Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a community, as > members, or anything else. But in the end, our like, or dislike of each other, is immaterial, as > is even our respect for each other. What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is > the best interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical part of the > Internet on both the African continent and within the global context. We have to strive to > apply our own individual minds to the problems faced, and the solutions required. Then, as > part of this community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and in > some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they will be rejected. I > don't believe any of us have a perfect track record of perfect proposals, because we are all > human, and humans are prone to error. The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed > then need to be weighed by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of > the speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not based on the > geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the merits of the arguments put > forward. Sadly, this is not what I am seeing in the last few years, and let me state clearly, that > I am as guilty of the issue I describe here as anyone else. What I am seeing is a community > that is no longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a subset of the > community. I see us divided along so many different lines, and sadly, those divides are not > leading to the spirited debate that will end in solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us > apart. As I said, I am not placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a far > wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any other here. > > We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view of "I'm right, and > you're wrong, so everything else you say must automatically be wrong." We have gotten to > the point where so often at meetings and on these lists, instead of listening to one another > based on the merits of the ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from the > content of the proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for the sake of attacking a > person, or a collective. This makes no sense, it is deeply harmful to growth on the continent, > and it is dangerous, because it creates a snowball effect that amplifiers and propagates. > > Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued in academia and > in research, is open mindedness. Academia welcomes debate, and it is through debate that > we grow, mature and learn. It is through spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, > that our ideas grow and blossom. That being said, there are many forms of debate. If I > examine the work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes as > fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these lists. If you read > http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you will see some of > the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we have seen of late. > > As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall back to many of these > types of arguments, but it is something we need to work repairing. We need to work towards > a point where our arguments, our thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather > than destroy. Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply amplifiers, > propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day reach a point where it > creates terminal injury. > > What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself included, started to look at > each other's thoughts and ideas based entirely on the merits of the arguments. Let us follow > academic principles and research the positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, > understanding all the facts surrounding our positions. Then let us debate these views from a > point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view that we are debating in order to find the > best possible path for AfriNIC as a community and as an organisation. I strongly believe that > if we, and again, I include myself, can approach things in this manner, we can all have our > perspectives changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better future for this community. > Please do not misunderstand my position here, I am not suggesting for one second that we > cease debate, I am simply suggesting that all of us attempt to focus more on the issues at > hand, rather than attacking the proposer, the collective, or anyone else. > > I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best for AfriNIC, I just am > of the opinion that we have very different ways of approaching it. Ways that are born based > on the experiences we have all had as we have moved through life. This is not to say that > any one way is better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes entirely > unique in nature. However, when you combine this diversity and this uniqueness you end up > with a stronger whole. Let us respect each other, and as Africans, as members of this > community, as interested parties, attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, > and work together for what is in the best interests of the organisation and community. Let us > leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and what builds, rather than what tears > down. > > With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a hand to anyone who is > willing. I am prepared to sit and engage one on one with anyone who wishes to do so, to > explore their point of view, and for them to see my point of view. In the spirit of seeking > common ground, so that where people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let > us attempt to mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are debating > the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us all. I am available on Skype, > via email, or face to face if anyone wishes to engage in that manner and finds themselves in > close geographic proximity to me. I believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe > in life, that if you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to start somewhere. > So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my actions, and my words. > > I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a community we can > move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are mutually seeking the best for > AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and each other's views. > > I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, because I believe > that the same issues that plague our debates in one forum, spread across all three, from the > policy side, through the member base, and into the wider community. I personally would > welcome engagement from any member of any of those lists. > > Yours Sincerely > > Andrew Alston > AfriNIC community member > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulos at sdnp.org.mw Mon Jul 18 12:28:45 2016 From: paulos at sdnp.org.mw (Dr Paulos B Nyirenda) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:28:45 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection In-Reply-To: References: , , Message-ID: <578CCB7D.19558.36BB5406@paulos.sdnp.org.mw> For me the long e-mail from Andrew helped but raised more questions on what it was all about. Honestly, it looks to me like and reads like a "Bernie Sanders speech presented in the presence of Hilarly Clinton without mentioning Hilarly" in these weeks that we are in now :-) I would have liked to see a more specific submission with events and people or groups which have generated this introspection. I do not believe that there will be any healing without specifics. It is good that Badru has stepped forward and I hope the results of that will come out in the open. However, I find it difficult to believe that an open invitation for others to get in touch with Andrew will yield the expected community healing that is being talked about in the e-mail. Hence, it is my hope that Andrew will reach out to specific individuals and/or groups that he has in mind on this e-mailed introspection and process ... whatever ... instead of him just sitting back and waiting for or expecting peopleo groups to reach out to him. He has made a good start but needs to go the extra mile. Regards, Paulos ====================== Dr Paulos B Nyirenda NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD http://www.registrar.mw On 16 Jul 2016 at 8:23, Andrew Alston wrote: > Thank you Hytham for your response, > > I look forward to further engagement with you as always.? > > Andrew > > Get Outlook for iOS > > _____________________________ > From: Haitham Nakhal > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 10:16 > Subject: Re: FW: Thoughts and introspection > To: Andrew Alston , > > > Dear Andrew, > > "I'm writing here as an Afrinic member" > > Thank you for your positive email and thanks for your moral courage to confess that you > were guilty in sometimes and took the initiative to clear the air and moving forward and > positively for the sake of Afrinic organization and members. > > Best Regrads, > Haitham El Nakhal? > ________________________________ > From: Andrew Alston > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 12:49:32 AM (UTC+02:00) Cairo > To: rpd List; members-discuss at afrinic.net; General Discussions of AFRINIC > Subject: [SUSPECT][members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection > > Hi All, > > Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to say, I have > thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as myself,? and with only my own > reflections guiding what I write below. > > Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we have seen within > AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some observations I would like to share. > > Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a community, as > members, or anything else.? But in the end, our like, or dislike of each other, is immaterial, as > is even our respect for each other.? What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is > the best interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical part of the > Internet on both the African continent and within the global context.? We have to strive to > apply our own individual minds to the problems faced, and the solutions required.? Then, as > part of this community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and in > some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they will be rejected.? I > don?t believe any of us have a perfect track record of perfect proposals, because we are all > human, and humans are prone to error.? The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed > then need to be weighed by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of > the speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not based on the > geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the merits of the arguments put > forward.? Sadly, this is not what I am seeing in the last few years, and let me state clearly, that > I am as guilty of the issue I describe here as anyone else.? What I am seeing is a community > that is no longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a subset of the > community.? I see us divided along so many different lines, and sadly, those divides are not > leading to the spirited debate that will end in solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us > apart.? As I said, I am not placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a far > wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any other here. > > We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view of "I?m right, and > you?re wrong, so everything else you say must automatically be wrong."? We have gotten to > the point where so often at meetings and on these lists, instead of listening to one another > based on the merits of the ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from the > content of the proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for the sake of attacking a > person, or a collective.? This makes no sense, it is deeply harmful to growth on the continent, > and it is dangerous, because it creates a snowball effect that amplifiers and propagates. > > Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued in academia and > in research, is open mindedness.? Academia welcomes debate, and it is through debate that > we grow, mature and learn.? It is through spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, > that our ideas grow and blossom.? That being said, there are many forms of debate.? If I > examine the work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes as > fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these lists.? If you read > http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you will see some of > the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we have seen of late. > > As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall back to many of these > types of arguments, but it is something we need to work repairing.? We need to work towards > a point where our arguments, our thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather > than destroy.? Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply amplifiers, > propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day reach a point where it > creates terminal injury. > > What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself included, started to look at > each other?s thoughts and ideas based entirely on the merits of the arguments.? Let us follow > academic principles and research the positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, > understanding all the facts surrounding our positions.? Then let us debate these views from a > point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view that we are debating in order to find the > best possible path for AfriNIC as a community and as an organisation.? I strongly believe that > if we, and again, I include myself, can approach things in this manner, we can all have our > perspectives changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better future for this community.? > Please do not misunderstand my position here, I am not suggesting for one second that we > cease debate, I am simply suggesting that all of us attempt to focus more on the issues at > hand, rather than attacking the proposer, the collective, or anyone else. > > I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best for AfriNIC, I just am > of the opinion that we have very different ways of approaching it.? Ways that are born based > on the experiences we have all had as we have moved through life.? This is not to say that > any one way is better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes entirely > unique in nature.? However, when you combine this diversity and this uniqueness you end up > with a stronger whole.? Let us respect each other, and as Africans, as members of this > community, as interested parties, attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, > and work together for what is in the best interests of the organisation and community.? Let us > leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and what builds, rather than what tears > down. > > With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a hand to anyone who is > willing.? I am prepared to sit and engage one on one with anyone who wishes to do so, to > explore their point of view, and for them to see my point of view.? In the spirit of seeking > common ground, so that where people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let > us attempt to mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are debating > the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us all.? I am available on Skype, > via email, or face to face if anyone wishes to engage in that manner and finds themselves in > close geographic proximity to me.? I believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe > in life, that if you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to start somewhere.? > So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my actions, and my words. > > I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a community we can > move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are mutually seeking the best for > AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and each other?s views. > > I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, because I believe > that the same issues that plague our debates in one forum, spread across all three, from the > policy side, through the member base, and into the wider community.? I personally would > welcome engagement from any member of any of those lists. > > Yours Sincerely > > Andrew Alston > AfriNIC community member > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulos at sdnp.org.mw Mon Jul 18 13:11:38 2016 From: paulos at sdnp.org.mw (Dr Paulos B Nyirenda) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 15:11:38 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] [members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection In-Reply-To: References: , <578CCB7D.19558.36BB5406@paulos.sdnp.org.mw>, Message-ID: <578CD58A.5935.36E296CE@paulos.sdnp.org.mw> On 18 Jul 2016 at 12:41, Andrew Alston wrote: > Hi Paulos, > ? > Just for clarification purposes.? Before sending the email to the community, there was also > request for direct engagement sort with several individuals. Great, however, the value of that e-mail would have been much greater if you had included these or some of them, it would have helped not to raise so many other questions and doubts. ? > I will continue to seek direct engagement where possible, however, the offer to engage > is still there for the whole community, and I am hoping that beyond just the engagement > I am inviting, that others will also read the contents of the email, and choose to have > their own one on one engagements between themselves and others they have conflict > with.? Let us not make this about specific people, this is about how the community as a > whole engages with each other, both one on one, and in groups and based on all the > divisions I referred to in my mail.? This sounds contradictory, engagement between one and one is about specific people ... or ... specific groups and such specifics are not chosen at random. I see this as of little value if there are no specifics both on people and on events. Regards, Paulos ====================== Dr Paulos B Nyirenda NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD http://www.registrar.mw > Fixing the position I see us in now, will never be solved > by one individual, it will take a collective effort between numerous parties. > ? > Andrew > ? > ? > From: Dr Paulos B Nyirenda [mailto:paulos at sdnp.org.mw] > Sent: 18 July 2016 15:29 > To: rpd List ; members-discuss at afrinic.net; > community-discuss at afrinic.net > Subject: Re: [rpd] [members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection > ? > ? > For me the long e-mail from Andrew helped but raised more questions on what it was all about. > ? > Honestly, it looks to me like and reads like a "Bernie Sanders speech presented in the presence > of Hilarly Clinton without mentioning Hilarly" in these weeks that we are in now :-) > ? > I would have liked to see a more specific submission with events and people or groups which > have generated this introspection. > ? > I do not believe that there will be any healing without specifics. It is good that Badru has stepped > forward and I hope the results of that will come out in the open. However, I find it difficult to > believe that an open invitation for others to get in touch with Andrew will yield the expected > community healing that is being talked about in the e-mail. > ? > Hence, it is my hope that Andrew will reach out to specific individuals and/or groups that he has in > mind on this e-mailed introspection? and process ... whatever ... instead of him just sitting back and > waiting for or expecting peopleo groups to reach out to him. He has made a good start but needs > to go the extra mile. > ? > Regards, > ? > Paulos > ====================== > Dr Paulos B Nyirenda > NIC.MW & .mw ccTLD > http://www.registrar.mw > ? > ? > On 16 Jul 2016 at 8:23, Andrew Alston wrote: > ? > > Thank you Hytham for your response, > > > > I look forward to further engagement with you as always.? > > > > Andrew > > > > Get Outlook for iOS > > > > _____________________________ > > From: Haitham Nakhal > > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 10:16 > > Subject: Re: FW: Thoughts and introspection > > To: Andrew Alston , > > > > > > Dear Andrew, > > > > "I'm writing here as an Afrinic member" > > > > Thank you for your positive email and thanks for your moral courage to confess that you > > were guilty in sometimes and took the initiative to clear the air and moving forward and > > positively for the sake of Afrinic organization and members. > > > > Best Regrads, > > Haitham El Nakhal? > >???? ________________________________ > >???? From: Andrew Alston > >???? Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 12:49:32 AM (UTC+02:00) Cairo > >???? To: rpd List; members-discuss at afrinic.net; General Discussions of AFRINIC > >???? Subject: [SUSPECT][members-discuss] Thoughts and introspection > >???? > >???? Hi All, > >???? > >???? Let me start by saying, I send what follows wearing no hats, other than to say, I have > >???? thought long and hard about what follows, and I send it as myself,? and with only my own > >???? reflections guiding what I write below. > >???? > >???? Over the last few days and months, I have thought deeply about what we have seen within > >???? AfriNIC over the last few years, and I have some observations I would like to share. > >???? > >???? Firstly, we may not all like each other, we may never see eye to eye as a community, as > >???? members, or anything else.? But in the end, our like, or dislike of each other, is immaterial, as > >???? is even our respect for each other.? What we do have to respect , and attempt to strive for, is > >???? the best interests of AfriNIC as an organisation, as a community, and as a critical part of the > >???? Internet on both the African continent and within the global context.? We have to strive to > >???? apply our own individual minds to the problems faced, and the solutions required.? Then, as > >???? part of this community, we have to attempt to voice our thoughts and our opinions, and in > >???? some cases those thoughts and opinions will be accepted, in others they will be rejected.? I > >???? don?t believe any of us have a perfect track record of perfect proposals, because we are all > >???? human, and humans are prone to error.? The ideas and thoughts and views that are proposed > >???? then need to be weighed by the community, not based on position, not based on the age of > >???? the speaker, not based on the linguistic background of the speaker, not based on the > >???? geographic location of the speaker, but entirely based on the merits of the arguments put > >???? forward.? Sadly, this is not what I am seeing in the last few years, and let me state clearly, that > >???? I am as guilty of the issue I describe here as anyone else.? What I am seeing is a community > >???? that is no longer attacking the issues, but attacking either the person, or a subset of the > >???? community.? I see us divided along so many different lines, and sadly, those divides are not > >???? leading to the spirited debate that will end in solutions, instead they are slowly tearing us > >???? apart.? As I said, I am not placing blame on any person or collective here, I believe this is a far > >???? wider problem than that, and I also state again, I am as guilty as any other here. > >???? > >???? We use procedures to divert from argument, we fight from a point of view of "I?m right, and > >???? you?re wrong, so everything else you say must automatically be wrong."? We have gotten to > >???? the point where so often at meetings and on these lists, instead of listening to one another > >???? based on the merits of the ideas, views and suggestions put forward, we divert from the > >???? content of the proposals and ideas and views, and instead attack, for the sake of attacking a > >???? person, or a collective.? This makes no sense, it is deeply harmful to growth on the continent, > >???? and it is dangerous, because it creates a snowball effect that amplifiers and propagates. > >???? > >???? Having worked in academic environments, one of the things that is valued in academia and > >???? in research, is open mindedness.? Academia welcomes debate, and it is through debate that > >???? we grow, mature and learn.? It is through spirited, and sometimes even heated exchanges, > >???? that our ideas grow and blossom.? That being said, there are many forms of debate.? If I > >???? examine the work by Don Lindsay, I can see many forms of debate that he describes as > >???? fallacious arguments creeping into the community exchanges across these lists.? If you read > >???? http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html I am sure you will see some of > >???? the forms of argument listed there as echoes of what we have seen of late. > >???? > >???? As I say, use of these forms is not unique to any person, and I to fall back to many of these > >???? types of arguments, but it is something we need to work repairing.? We need to work towards > >???? a point where our arguments, our thoughts, our ideas, our views are spoken to build rather > >???? than destroy.? Every time we resort to the behaviours described above, it simply amplifiers, > >???? propagates and spreads, and the damage it causes may one day reach a point where it > >???? creates terminal injury. > >???? > >???? What I would like to ask of everyone one of us, is that we, myself included, started to look at > >???? each other?s thoughts and ideas based entirely on the merits of the arguments.? Let us follow > >???? academic principles and research the positions we are taking, carefully, holistically, > >???? understanding all the facts surrounding our positions.? Then let us debate these views from a > >???? point of view of knowledge, and from a point of view that we are debating in order to find the > >???? best possible path for AfriNIC as a community and as an organisation.? I strongly believe that > >???? if we, and again, I include myself, can approach things in this manner, we can all have our > >???? perspectives changed, and all ideas can contribute to a better future for this community.? > >???? Please do not misunderstand my position here, I am not suggesting for one second that we > >???? cease debate, I am simply suggesting that all of us attempt to focus more on the issues at > >???? hand, rather than attacking the proposer, the collective, or anyone else. > >???? > >???? I truly believe that the members of this community all want what is best for AfriNIC, I just am > >???? of the opinion that we have very different ways of approaching it.? Ways that are born based > >???? on the experiences we have all had as we have moved through life.? This is not to say that > >???? any one way is better than another, it is just to say they are different, and sometimes entirely > >???? unique in nature.? However, when you combine this diversity and this uniqueness you end up > >???? with a stronger whole.? Let us respect each other, and as Africans, as members of this > >???? community, as interested parties, attempt to move past our prejudices, whatever they are, > >???? and work together for what is in the best interests of the organisation and community.? Let us > >???? leave the personal behind, and focus on the issues and what builds, rather than what tears > >???? down. > >???? > >???? With all of this now said and done, I personally would like to extend a hand to anyone who is > >???? willing.? I am prepared to sit and engage one on one with anyone who wishes to do so, to > >???? explore their point of view, and for them to see my point of view.? In the spirit of seeking > >???? common ground, so that where people feel that my actions are the cause of any discord, let > >???? us attempt to mend the issues, and go back to academic principles where we are debating > >???? the issues in an attempt to build a better, brighter future for us all.? I am available on Skype, > >???? via email, or face to face if anyone wishes to engage in that manner and finds themselves in > >???? close geographic proximity to me.? I believe that healing has to start somewhere, and I believe > >???? in life, that if you desire change for a better tomorrow, that change has to start somewhere.? > >???? So, if it must, let that change start with me, and my actions, and my words. > >???? > >???? I look forward to engaging with all of you, and I hope that together, as a community we can > >???? move beyond the divides and come to a point where we are mutually seeking the best for > >???? AfriNIC, with respect for each other, and each other?s views. > >???? > >???? I am sending this to all three lists, RPD, Members, and the Community, because I believe > >???? that the same issues that plague our debates in one forum, spread across all three, from the > >???? policy side, through the member base, and into the wider community.? I personally would > >???? welcome engagement from any member of any of those lists. > >???? > >???? Yours Sincerely > >???? > >???? Andrew Alston > >???? AfriNIC community member > > > > > > > ? > ?? > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2016.0.7688 / Virus Database: 4627/12638 - Release Date: 07/18/16 From dmurungi at techsupport.co.tz Tue Jul 19 21:47:30 2016 From: dmurungi at techsupport.co.tz (Mwanguhya Daniel Murungi) Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing In-Reply-To: <82E64662-A369-48DD-BC45-506D6B6DC754@nftconsult.com> References: <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <873018586.2101273.1467031867019.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <82E64662-A369-48DD-BC45-506D6B6DC754@nftconsult.com> Message-ID: +1 The board should publish the 2014 report as promised in Tunis. Daniel _____________________________ From: Badru Ntege Sent: Monday, June 27, 2016 5:07 PM Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Annual Reports 2014 and 2015 Missing To: General Discussions of AFRINIC , Mirriam Namwau ?+1 ? I hope there?s nothing in the mauritian companies act preventing this from ?happening. ?? On 6/27/16, 3:51 PM, "Mirriam Namwau" wrote: On 27 Jun 2016 13:50, "Alan Barrett" wrote: > > > > On 27 Jun 2016, at 13:40, Arnaud AMELINA wrote:> > > Dear CEO, > > > > Compared to all the above how can you explain the delay of the 2014 annual report. > > I will not attempt to explain the delay, except to say that I amstill learning the requirements, and we will try to do better in future. >Thank you foryour frank response and the community hopes that the future will lookdifferent. Please note that this is a requirement for the board and"some" board members were there when 2013 report was presented and theorganization must have memory. We as a community can't afford to remindthose responsible for their duties especially when reports for 2014 and2015 are not presented or available on line in year 2016.MirriamLadiesInTech South Sudan _______________________________________________Community-Discuss mailing listCommunity-Discuss at afrinic.nethttps://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Alain.Aina at wacren.net Tue Jul 19 23:01:25 2016 From: Alain.Aina at wacren.net (ALAIN AINA) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 03:01:25 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <99F76360-3C68-47EB-87E0-179E5514C77B@wacren.net> > On Jul 14, 2016, at 12:27 PM, Alan Barrett wrote: > > [replying only on members-discuss] > >> On 14 Jul 2016, at 11:29, Noah wrote: >> >> On 28 Jun 2016 19:08, "Marcus K. G. Adomey" wrote: >>> >>> Allow me to restate the questions here once again: >>> >>> What problem are solving? >>> What options have been evaluated? >>> What is the meaning of the membership fees, which increase with my category If i have to pay allocations fees anytime i request additional resources? >>> Shouldn?t the membership fees be turned to a lower maintenance fees at a lower price? >>> Have we done impact analysis? >>> What is the foreseen negative impact on membership and how do we mitigate? (Some may not come for additional allocation as they have to pay allocation fees plus increase in membership fees.. ) >>> What is expected impact on revenue and how we plan to use it? >>> >> >> We never recieved any feedback to this important questions. >> >> The most recent submission by the chair on the same was not clear either. > > In my opinion all those questions were either answered previously, or were interpreted as rhetorical devices rather than actual questions. However, I?ll answer them below. > > What problem are we solving? (a) When the fee structure was defined in 2004, these once-off fees were intended to be once per allocation or assignment, No. AFRNIC is responsible for maintaining accurate and complete registration of Internet number resources in accordance with the policies established by the Internet community. To provide for an equitable cost recovery process, AFRINIC adopted a fees model[*] which charges an initial transaction fee for the registration of Internet number resources and an annual fee for ongoing registration services(in form of membership fees) as described below: LIRs LIRs are allocated IP addresses for distribution to the users of their Internet services. They do sub-allocations and reassignment and report in AFRINIC database. Initial ======== New LIR pay setup fees(once-off) for account setup which depends of service category. New LIR pay an initial fee that corresponds to the service category (IPv4) approved as bulk registrations services fees. This can be prorated depending on period of the year they join. Annual ======= LIR pay annual membership fees per category(the total of the IPv4 received in previous year or initial year) as renewal fees every year. End Users End users receive IP addresses for use in their internal networks only, and not for distribution to external users of their Internet services. Initial ======== End-Users pay Assignment fee for each ?new" IPv4 address assignment based on the service category approved End-users pay an initial fee that corresponds to the service category (IPv4) approved as maintenance fees. Annual ====== End-users pay annual membership fees per category(the total of the assigned IPv4) as maintenance renewal fees at anniversary date. Interesting details in the FAQ : http://www.afrinic.net/en/faqs/billing > but somehow in the intervening years they were implemented inconsistently, which was a mistake that should be corrected. The fees model described above have been implemented consistently. So nothing to be corrected. > (b) Some members were paying for their requests to be evaluated, and some were not (depending on whether they were an end user or an LIR, and depending on whether it was their first request or a subsequent request), which was unfair on both AFRINIC and the members who were paying. According to the fees model, no fee was meant for request evaluation?. The model was designed to be somehow fair to LIR and End-users, while making AFRINIC covers operations costs. End-user are charged per service and pay less membership fees as maintenance fees. > (c) AFRINIC needs more revenue, and correcting this past mistake is a simple way of gaining a small increase in revenue. I think increasing AFRINIC revenue should take a more systemic approach and not try to fix what is not broken. Let analyse the fees model and determine the way forward in the interest of AFRINIC and the members. The RIR future seems to be in Registry data accuracy and not in allocation or assignment. Hope this helps ?Alain > > What options have been evaluated? This correction to a past mistake was an easy and obvious change for the short term. Several possible changes to the fee structure are being considered for the longer term. When a proposal is ready, it will be made. > > What is the meaning of the membership fees? The membership fee is based on the size of the member considering all the resurces held by the member, and is charged annually. The allocation or assignment fee is based on the size of each individual allocation or assignment, and is paid only once. > > Shouldn?t the fees be lower? Of course that would be nice, but it?s not realistic. > > Have we done impact analysis? Yes. The expected positive effect on revenue is about USD 200k per year, based on a simulation using data from 2015. > > What is the foreseen negative impact on membership? None. New members will pay exactly the same as before when they join and receive their first allocation or assignment. Existing members will pay exactly the same as before unless they come back for an additional allocation or assignment. > > What is the impact on revenue? Already answered: $200k per year. > > How do we plan to use the money? For AFRINIC operations. > > > Alan Barrett > > > > _______________________________________________ > Members-Discuss mailing list > Members-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss From joematabaroakilimali at gmail.com Wed Jul 20 07:40:29 2016 From: joematabaroakilimali at gmail.com (joseph MATABARO) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 08:40:29 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> Message-ID: <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> I expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis without redacting them. Le 15/07/2016 15:59, Benjamin Eshun a ?crit : > Dear Alan, > > What secrets do we have to hide about how AfriNIC is governed? Why > not provide the minutes without redaction so if it resolves this > festering matter once and for all? > > It does not makes sense to me and it is clear that there is something > to hide. The board is not able to tell the community what transpired > and points fingers at those who would inform us. > > I would appreciate it better if the organisation was a private company > or had some information that was of some trade secret value. But > AfriNIC is basically a monopoly in the region and cannot have > competition from any of the other RIRs. > > I'm beginning to see signs of elected officers of a community that > unilaterally take decisions and actions without due recourse to the > membership that put them there in the first place. > > This truly saddens me. Afrinic board meetings should be public. > > Benjamin > > > On Jul 15, 2016, at 5:26 AM, Alan Barrett > wrote: > > >> On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun > > wrote: >> >> Chair Sunday, >> >> When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings >> as it being after a 1 year, the >> minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can >> expect it. > > Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has > committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them > before publication. In the case of old minutes that have not yet been > published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had > never been planned to be published) is ongoing. I expect it to be > done by the end of 2016. > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 dmurungi at techsupport.co.tz Wed Jul 20 07:41:13 2016 From: dmurungi at techsupport.co.tz (Mwanguhya Daniel Murungi) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 07:41:13 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> Message-ID: +1? I also expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis as this has taken far too long. Daniel _____________________________ From: Benjamin Eshun Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 6:02 PM Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Dear Alan, What secrets do we have to hide about how AfriNIC is governed? ?Why not provide the minutes without redaction so if it resolves this festering matter once and for all? It does not makes sense to me and it is clear that there is something to hide. ?The board is not able to tell the community what transpired and points fingers at those who would inform us. ?? I would appreciate it better if the organisation was a private company or had some information that was of some trade secret value. ?But AfriNIC is basically a monopoly in the region and cannot have competition from any of the other RIRs. ? I'm beginning to see signs of elected officers of a community that unilaterally take decisions and actions without due recourse to the membership that put them there in the first place.? This truly saddens me. Afrinic board meetings should be public. Benjamin On Jul 15, 2016, at 5:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun wrote: Chair Sunday, When can we the community have the ?transcripts ?of the 2014 meetings ?as it being after a 1 year, the minutes are still not published. ?So pls tell us know when we can expect it. Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. ?The Board has committed to publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. ?In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be published) is ongoing. ?I expect it to be done by the end of 2016. Alan Barrett _______________________________________________ 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 jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Wed Jul 20 14:09:51 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:09:51 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, joseph MATABARO wrote: > I expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis > without redacting them. it seems the concerned parties badru and andrew have started a reconciliation process. may be you forget this hole redaction thing and let them settle their issues first ;-o ? > Le 15/07/2016 15:59, Benjamin Eshun a ?crit : > > Dear Alan, > > What secrets do we have to hide about how AfriNIC is governed? Why not > provide the minutes without redaction so if it resolves this festering > matter once and for all? > > It does not makes sense to me and it is clear that there is something to > hide. The board is not able to tell the community what transpired and > points fingers at those who would inform us. > > I would appreciate it better if the organisation was a private company or > had some information that was of some trade secret value. But AfriNIC is > basically a monopoly in the region and cannot have competition from any of > the other RIRs. > > I'm beginning to see signs of elected officers of a community that > unilaterally take decisions and actions without due recourse to the > membership that put them there in the first place. > > This truly saddens me. Afrinic board meetings should be public. > > Benjamin > > > On Jul 15, 2016, at 5:26 AM, Alan Barrett wrote: > > > On 15 Jul 2016, at 02:43, Benjamin Eshun wrote: > > > Chair Sunday, > > > When can we the community have the transcripts of the 2014 meetings as it > being after a 1 year, the > > minutes are still not published. So pls tell us know when we can expect it. > > > Don?t expect transcripts to be published at all. The Board has committed to > publish minutes, but reserves the right to redact them before publication. > In the case of old minutes that have not yet been published, the process of > redaction (to remove information that had never been planned to be > published) is ongoing. I expect it to be done by the end of 2016. > > Alan Barrett > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From noah at neo.co.tz Wed Jul 20 15:00:11 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 18:00:11 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Jackson Muthili wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, joseph MATABARO > wrote: > > I expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis > > without redacting them. > > it seems the concerned parties badru and andrew have started a > reconciliation process. may be you forget this hole redaction thing > and let them settle their issues first ;-o ? > Jackson, Perhaps anything you know which the rest of the community doesn't. Please let us not undermine what the rest of the community and membership has been asking for and was promised to be published as is since 2014. Truth 1st, reconciliation, follows else we come back to this over and over like some members brought it up. Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Wed Jul 20 18:53:27 2016 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2016 21:53:27 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Resolution 201604.274 about Set-Up fees In-Reply-To: References: <57727625.5040506@skannet.com> <3AA472DF-FA79-459C-B5C4-563A6393614A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: On 20 Jul 2016 19:39, "Seun Ojedeji" wrote: > > Hello Noah, > Hi Seun, > Coming back on this, I think I may have misunderstood you(apologies for that). You are right; the update introduces new charges to existing LIR that gets new allocations but not to EU since they would normally be charged assignment fee anyway(as is the case with previous fee schedule) > Good.... We can find ways to increase on AFRINIC cofers and some folk have already suggested some ideas. Just engage the membership and the community and there is nothing wrong with that. > Regards > Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jacksonmuthi at gmail.com Thu Jul 21 06:36:02 2016 From: jacksonmuthi at gmail.com (Jackson Muthili) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:36:02 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Noah wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Jackson Muthili > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, joseph MATABARO >> wrote: >> > I expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis >> > without redacting them. >> >> it seems the concerned parties badru and andrew have started a >> reconciliation process. may be you forget this hole redaction thing >> and let them settle their issues first ;-o ? > > > Jackson, > > Perhaps anything you know which the rest of the community doesn't. it's all here on mailing list. andrew sent message admitting guilt on some of his actions. badru wrote saying he's written to andrew privately on the same. > > Please let us not undermine what the rest of the community and membership > has been asking for and was promised to be published as is since 2014. > > Truth 1st, reconciliation, follows else we come back to this over and over > like some members brought it up. > > Noah > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > Community-Discuss at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > From boubakarbarry at gmail.com Thu Jul 21 14:35:35 2016 From: boubakarbarry at gmail.com (Boubakar Barry) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> Message-ID: I cannot count how many times this has been requested since Tunis in June 2015. >From my understanding, Board and Secretariat are still working on editing the minutes for community consumption. Everyone can feel that there is an ambient suspicion about the Board failing to address this issue of minutes for over one year. It has been suggested that this is to preserve Mr. Badru Ntege?s dignity. However, if I recall well, Badru himself requested the publishing of not even the minutes only, but the transcripts of that Board meeting in Mauritius. Moreover, I think it would also be unfair for the Board to adopt redacted minutes of a meeting in which some then Board members participated in but are no longer in the Board, and some current Board members did not participate in. Therefore, wouldn?t it be wise for the Board to release the (unredacted) minutes or even the transcripts in order to close this definitely so that we can move on? It has the power to do so. Boubakar On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Jackson Muthili wrote: > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Noah wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Jackson Muthili > > > wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, joseph MATABARO > >> wrote: > >> > I expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis > >> > without redacting them. > >> > >> it seems the concerned parties badru and andrew have started a > >> reconciliation process. may be you forget this hole redaction thing > >> and let them settle their issues first ;-o ? > > > > > > Jackson, > > > > Perhaps anything you know which the rest of the community doesn't. > > it's all here on mailing list. > andrew sent message admitting guilt on some of his actions. badru > wrote saying he's written to andrew privately on the same. > > > > > Please let us not undermine what the rest of the community and membership > > has been asking for and was promised to be published as is since 2014. > > > > Truth 1st, reconciliation, follows else we come back to this over and > over > > like some members brought it up. > > > > Noah > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 badru.ntege at nftconsult.com Thu Jul 21 17:14:54 2016 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 17:14:54 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Council of Elders In-Reply-To: References: <54726452-2D31-4B20-8644-CB722FE01BD3@controlfreak.co.za> <022D49B6-4EE2-43A4-8374-BCC509EAC209@controlfreak.co.za> <92A30977-E17D-4735-B4E7-9359E8B6DBAF@controlfreak.co.za> <58845258-1CC3-48BF-B1F9-D90736A65982@gmail.com> <57867253.8000903@posix.co.za> <8017F0DA-69A3-4538-AB21-F821DDAC27FF@delong.com> <83D7B029-0266-42B7-AB69-2ED4F1465F92@trstech.net> <1F928FF3-5BDB-465D-844C-F80F3D15E7AA@gmail.com> <0A08FD12-1235-4158-A8C3-92C16C2F0D48@afrinic.net> <140C6B8F-BA0F-43BE-A928-725B87FC7428@gmail.com> <578F2AED.5020305@gmail.com> , Message-ID: Comments below On 21 Jul 2016, at 5:36 pm, Boubakar Barry > wrote: I cannot count how many times this has been requested since Tunis in June 2015. >From my understanding, Board and Secretariat are still working on editing the minutes for community consumption. Everyone can feel that there is an ambient suspicion about the Board failing to address this issue of minutes for over one year. It has been suggested that this is to preserve Mr. Badru Ntege?s dignity. However, if I recall well, Badru himself requested the publishing of not even the minutes only, but the transcripts of that Board meeting in Mauritius. Just to clarify and to probably suggest that this issue be taken up by a select and cross cutting community or member working group. The longer it stays open it does not help the community. Redaction will cause suspicion. Which ever way it is done. The board might feel that publishing will jeopardise there responsibilities as a board. Either way I do not need to protected as I have nothing to hide which is why I did what I did in tunis as a last option. It's time for some humility by all those responsible to sort this issue. I do not have to be involved in whatever dialogue but putting our heads in the sand and hoping it will go away might not be the best option. Badru Moreover, I think it would also be unfair for the Board to adopt redacted minutes of a meeting in which some then Board members participated in but are no longer in the Board, and some current Board members did not participate in. Therefore, wouldn?t it be wise for the Board to release the (unredacted) minutes or even the transcripts in order to close this definitely so that we can move on? It has the power to do so. Boubakar On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Jackson Muthili > wrote: On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Noah > wrote: > > > On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 5:09 PM, Jackson Muthili > > wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 10:40 AM, joseph MATABARO >> > wrote: >> > I expect the board to release the 2014 minutes as promised in Tunis >> > without redacting them. >> >> it seems the concerned parties badru and andrew have started a >> reconciliation process. may be you forget this hole redaction thing >> and let them settle their issues first ;-o ? > > > Jackson, > > Perhaps anything you know which the rest of the community doesn't. it's all here on mailing list. andrew sent message admitting guilt on some of his actions. badru wrote saying he's written to andrew privately on the same. > > Please let us not undermine what the rest of the community and membership > has been asking for and was promised to be published as is since 2014. > > Truth 1st, reconciliation, follows else we come back to this over and over > like some members brought it up. > > Noah > > _______________________________________________ > 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 sergekbk at gmail.com Fri Jul 22 09:05:27 2016 From: sergekbk at gmail.com (sergekbk) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 10:05:27 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Another BOD Governance Issue Message-ID: Dear All, As candidates for the last BoD elections, i went to read the board meeting where the elections slate was approved. From the may 2016 minutes, i noticed? surprisingly that? the board agreed? at the beginning of the meeting that board members who were running for election can participe in the discussions on the slate, but not vote. see below ======== In agenda review Christian Bope pointed out that Agenda Item No 6.3 (Approval of Candidates of Election) may be?possible conflict of interest for the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman since they are both?standing for election. Sunday Folayan clarified that there is no conflict of interest in the discussion of the Agenda Item; but?the?conflict is in the vote. As such the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman will not vote on any?decision. =========== But i am surprised that when the chair lost connectivity, vice-chair did not take over as per? 19.1 of the bylaws and Kris Seeburn has to chair the session to avoid any Conflict of interest. This is a breach to the bylaws and bad governance. Why is Conflict of Interest? invoked? later on ? See below ============ 6.3 Approval of candidates for election The CEO presented the list of nominations that had been received for the Board?election, in accordance with the terms of the Bylaws section 12.14(i). The Chairman clarified that the Board cannot approve the slate of candidates, as it is the?job of the NomCom. The Board is only approving that the process has been followed?and approving the candidates that were nominated as input to NomCom, but not the?slate of candidates as output from NomCom. The Board reviewed the list of candidates and discussed them one by one. The Chairman lost connectivity at 16:48 UTC, Kris Seeburn acted as Chairman to avoid any?conflict of interest in the review of candidates. The Chairman re-joined the meeting at 17:02 UTC. The review of the list of candidates?was completed under the temporary chairmanship of Kris Seeburn. Kris Seeburn proposed a vote to certify the decision of the Board. ============== Also, I noticed that the vote on the resolution was unanimous excluding Sunday Folayan and Haitham El Nakhal? but including? Ms Aminata Garba who was running for the election too. =========== Resolution 201605.279 All nominations for the 2016 Board election are approved in terms of the Bylaws?section 12.14(i). Proposed Kris Seeburn. Seconded Andrew Alston. Passed unanimously, with Sunday Folayan and Haitham El Nakhal abstaining. This is an example showing that board governance need to be improved for a better future of our organization. With Regards. Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alan.barrett at afrinic.net Fri Jul 22 09:23:50 2016 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 13:23:50 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Another BOD Governance Issue In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > On 22 Jul 2016, at 13:05, sergekbk wrote: > > Dear All, > > As candidates for the last BoD elections, i went to read the board meeting where the elections slate was approved. The Board did not approve the slate. The Board approved the nominations. The Election Committee finalises the slate, and has the freedom to choose which approved nominations do or do not appear on the slate. > From the may 2016 minutes, i noticed surprisingly that the board agreed at the beginning of the meeting that board members who were running for election can participe in the discussions on the slate, but not vote. see below The minutes refer to approval of nominations, not approval of the slate. Alan Barrett From sergekbk at gmail.com Fri Jul 22 11:15:06 2016 From: sergekbk at gmail.com (sergekbk) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:15:06 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Another BOD Governance Issue Message-ID: Hello Alan, The point is with BOD proceeding. We can notice some inconstencies in conflict of Interest management. Sunday, Haitham and Aminata are in the slate of candidates. 1. Sunday? can chair the session while Haitham? can't because of conflict of interest when Sunday lost connectivity. This seems a Bylaws (section 19.1)breach as Haitham (Vice Chair) is present but the chaimanship is given to Kris. 2.Sunday and Haitham abstained to vote to approve the nominations while Aminata did not. Regards. Serge IlungaCell: +243814443160Skype: sergekbkR.D.Congo-------- Original message --------From: Alan Barrett Date: 07/22/2016 10:23 (GMT+01:00) To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Another BOD Governance Issue > On 22 Jul 2016, at 13:05, sergekbk wrote: > > Dear All, > > As candidates for the last BoD elections, i went to read the board meeting where the elections slate was approved. The Board did not approve the slate.? The Board approved the nominations.? The Election Committee finalises the slate, and has the freedom to choose which approved nominations do or do not appear on the slate. > From the may 2016 minutes, i noticed? surprisingly that? the board agreed? at the beginning of the meeting that board members who were running for election can participe in the discussions on the slate, but not vote. see below The minutes refer to approval of nominations, not approval of the slate. Alan Barrett _______________________________________________ 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 madomey at hotmail.com Tue Jul 26 14:19:06 2016 From: madomey at hotmail.com (Marcus K. G. Adomey) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 14:19:06 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AoB of the Minutes of the Board Meeting - May 11, 2016 Message-ID: Dear AfriNIC Board Chair, The AoB of the ?Minutes of the Board Meeting Held on Thursday 11 May 2016 AT 15:27 UTC? on ?Requirement to resign from other positions when accepting a nomination to the Board? is raising two questions that is raising eye browse in the community and need to be addressed. Why this situation of conflict, well known to the Board, was not included in the TOR on which the NomCom2016 run the elections of Botswana? Since the board is directing the NomCom2016 to include this situation of conflict in their report to the community, could you please tell us whether NomCom2016 is now accountable to the community or not. Thank you Marcus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mark.tinka at seacom.mu Sun Jul 31 12:51:42 2016 From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka) Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2016 14:51:42 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] SAFNOG-3 Deferred to April 2017 Message-ID: <20d57be1-bc71-82a1-fe76-b97d64b08028@seacom.mu> Hello all. I, with much regret, have to inform you that due to unavoidable circumstances, the SAFNOG-3 meeting has been deferred to our usual slot in April of 2017. Details have been posted to our web site at the link below: http://www.safnog.org/safnog-3-deferred-to-april-2017/ On behalf of the SAFNOG Management Committee, I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience this will most certainly cause you, and look forward to seeing you at the meeting in April of 2017. For all delegates that had already registered to attend the meeting this August, you will be automatically refunded in full. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to send an e-mail to: secretariat at safnog dot org Details on the SAFNOG-3 meeting in April of 2017 will be communicated in the coming weeks. Mark Tinka On Behalf of the SAFNOG Management Committee