[Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Accountability assessment - bylaws changes

Arnaud AMELINA amelnaud at gmail.com
Mon Sep 19 12:14:26 UTC 2016

Hi Community,
Well done Chris !

I support that effort  be made to build consensus, as the topics are very



2016-09-19 12:09 GMT+00:00 Christian Bope <christian.bope at unikin.ac.cd>:

> Dear CEO,
> [speaking as a member of the community]
> Following last week discussion on the accountability review and others
> points raised by the community which was not in your original document,
> here my response.
> 1.  *On the Accountability Review.*
> This review is from an independent AFRINIC's accountability review which
> identified areas need to be improved. Improving RIR accountability is very
> important in this context of IANA stewardship transition where the
> community will be exercising important role in the oversight of the IANA
> functions.
> So it is very crucial that the community gives this discussion the
> required attention and the consensual approach is more needed.
> It will be unfortunate if we did not follow these important improvements
> due to lack of consensus.
> *2. on the Process*
> It was expected that the community discuss, express view and concern
> thereafter the Leadership will do his best effort to build consensus.
> Consensus here is strictly in the sense of RIR practices mean The Rough
> Consensus Model *[1]*.
> Ideally, people shall be encourage to comment on the list for the sake of
> archive and off list contribution should be discouraged and not accepted.
> That why some members of the community suggested the creation of a
> committee to lead the process.
> *3. On the discussion.*
> Community has expressed views on each points. As expected there were
> convergences and divergences. For example, points 3,4, 5 had active and
> intensive discussions while reading may sound like profound disagreement.
> We shall now entire to the consensus building mode by opening the
> disagreement views and addressing one by one then we'll build ROUGH
> Another example, on point 11, there was no objection, but some suggestions
> even propose more such as "Registered Members only MUST never amend the
> bylaws, ..." and The proposed amendment should be published not less than
> 60 days and not more than 90 days before, with the provisions for more
> members to comment online and in any meeting held during the consultation
> period"
> *4. On the other points.*
> Beyond the 12 points, some areas of improvements were suggested.
> For example, https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/
> 2016-June/000350.html lists some of the points
> *[1]* https://www.nro.net/about-the-nro/rir-accountability on section 1.4
> Regards,
> Bope
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160919/b467c390/attachment.html>

More information about the Community-Discuss mailing list