From geier at geier.ne.tz Sat Jun 1 00:58:11 2019 From: geier at geier.ne.tz (Frank Habicht) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 03:58:11 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> Message-ID: Dear Alan, Thanks very much. Regards, Frank On 31/05/2019 20:54, Alan Barrett wrote: > > >> On 28 May 2019, at 14:49, Frank Habicht wrote: >> >> Dear AfriNIC board members, >> >> reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion >> items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members >> are to adhere to. >> >> Can you share the document please? > > The Board NDA has been published at > > Regards, > Alan Barrett From owen at delong.com Sat Jun 1 07:00:42 2019 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 00:00:42 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <8671312b-793a-861f-31f1-6d9d682fb893@posix.co.za> <41c382a1-8acc-b521-8480-de0e84272748@geier.ne.tz>

Message-ID: <80E9C6B0-3AD1-4CD9-874F-A62EDA769636@delong.com> > On May 31, 2019, at 04:22 , Badru Ntege wrote: > > From what I see here > > A collective and binding decision was made by board to release information at an appropriate time. That decision would have been bidding to all board members as per procedure. I see no such decision? Please point to it in the appropriate minutes. > One or two members went ahead to release that information outside the board agreed process. ?? The information had already been released to the general public by the courts. Why is there even a question of separate control of release of the information to the community by board members?? > Whether or not that information was already publicly available. The intent of the members that released the information was in response to community asking for the board to release the information. This is a rather creative interpretation of the community request. The information had already been released. The community was asking the board to further distribute it to make it more easily available to the community so that the community didn?t all need to try and individually find it through the Mauritian court system. > The proper way for that information to be released would have been through the approved board process. The proper way would have been for the board to decide to release it immediately. The idea that the board feels there is an appropriate delay to releasing an already public document is what is truly appalling here. > The members in question that released information did it in their capacity as board members and would have received that information under that capacity. The members could just as easily have received it through other workings of the courts in Mauritius. You cannot say this for certain. > Every action has consequences and as adults we make decisions having considered the consequences one would assume. The action that should carry the most consequences here is the attempt to block the flow of already public information to the community by the board chair. > I urge us all to be rational. I somehow believe you all believe you are acting in the best interest of our organisations AfriNIC. You urge us to be rational, yet you appear to be supporting a position of pure absurdity. Namely the idea that a public document can be treated as confidential information. > Lets give the people we elected the respect they deserve, advise them when they need the guidance and allow them to do the job. When a person is elected to the board, we have placed our trust in them. We expect them to foster and facilitate good and timely communications of important data to the community. We do not expect them to be wasting time and effort trying to prevent public documents from being further disseminated to the community and we certainly do not expect them to be playing games trying to sanction or censor other board members from further communicating information which is already in the public domain regardless of how it came into their possession. It is not disrespectful to a board member to constructively criticize such grossly incorrect actions when they make them. It would, however, be disrespectful to the community and the membership and the governance process to allow such actions to go completely unchallenged. Since I have not seen the board confidentiality agreement, I cannot comment specifically on its contents. I will note, however, that the following construct is common (in some form or other) to virtually every NDA I have ever seen: 2. Exclusions from Confidential Information. Receiving Party's obligations under this Agreement do not extend to information that is: (a) publicly known at the time of disclosure or subsequently becomes publicly known through no fault of the Receiving Party; (b) discovered or created by the Receiving Party before disclosure by Disclosing Party; (c) learned by the Receiving Party through legitimate means other than from the Disclosing Party or Disclosing Party's representatives; or (d) is disclosed by Receiving Party with Disclosing Party's prior written approval. If this construct is not present in the existing board agreement, it certainly should be added. It makes it very clear that information which is already public is not subject to the terms of the agreement. > We cannot all be board members at the same time so we choose a few from the wide community to do that role. Of course, but we then have the right to expect them to use reasonable judgment and act in the interests of the membership and the broader community. Wasting the entirety of a special meeting bickering about the confidentiality of public information is not reasonable judgment, not in the interests of the membership or the community, and not responsible use of company resources. > Looking forward to hosting you all in beautiful Kampala for AIS19 See you there. Owen -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Sat Jun 1 07:05:28 2019 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 00:05:28 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <5A3844F2-5C94-4F3B-8064-61F18B5F1F83@delong.com> Thank you, Alan. I hope the board will not express further contempt over your disclosure of this document. Owen > On May 31, 2019, at 10:54 , Alan Barrett wrote: > > > >> On 28 May 2019, at 14:49, Frank Habicht wrote: >> >> Dear AfriNIC board members, >> >> reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion >> items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members >> are to adhere to. >> >> Can you share the document please? > > The Board NDA has been published at > > Regards, > 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 Sat Jun 1 07:16:14 2019 From: alan.barrett at afrinic.net (Alan Barrett) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 11:16:14 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [Board-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <5A3844F2-5C94-4F3B-8064-61F18B5F1F83@delong.com> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> <5A3844F2-5C94-4F3B-8064-61F18B5F1F83@delong.com> Message-ID: > On 1 Jun 2019, at 11:05, Owen DeLong via board wrote: > > Thank you, Alan. > > I hope the board will not express further contempt over your disclosure of this document. >> The Board NDA has been published at The Chair asked for the document to be published. Alan From sm+af at afrinic.net Sat Jun 1 10:37:07 2019 From: sm+af at afrinic.net (S. Moonesamy) Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 03:37:07 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude (off-topic) In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl>

<6.2.5.6.2.20190530011306.0ea1c8b0@elandnews.com> <9295CBB7-D5A7-4366-99B2-6AAC668740D7@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20190530033643.119934c8@elandnews.com> <5091B6A8-2612-4725-A6B4-547064526B05@liquidtelecom.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20190530103217.0d1f75e8@elandnews.com> Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20190601091905.0c13f6a8@elandnews.com> Dear Alan, There was a mistake in my previous email. The correct URL is http://r.elandsys.com/r/78898 Regards, S. Moonesamy From nishal at controlfreak.co.za Sat Jun 1 19:00:58 2019 From: nishal at controlfreak.co.za (Nishal Goburdhan) Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 21:00:58 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Afrinic Services DOWN In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 31 May 2019, at 18:46, francis asiboh via Community-Discuss wrote: > Dear board members and all members of the community > All Afrinic services (Whois, RPKI, Afrinic.net, etc..) were down > yesterday you didn?t mention DNS. if you did, it would have invalidated the ?all? in your sentence. > the 30th of May 2019 for a very long time. Board, where is the > Disaster > Recovery Strategy in this particular kind of incident ? the first thing you learn about a disaster recovery plan, is knowing _when_ to deploy it (ie. what is classed as a disaster). afrinic suffered from an outage of services in JNB for 3h53m. nothing more. it was not a disaster by any stretch of the imagination. being hyperbolic, doesn?t help anyone. at worst, your mail _to_ afrinic might have been slightly delayed (heck, you wouldn?t even get the 4h smtp warning!). if you were doing validation, your RPKI cache would have not had the _most up to date_ ROAs (but validation would have *still* worked!), and you wouldn?t have had been able to make a few DNS or WHOIS updates. meanwhile, the internet, still carried on .. > Since now, no Root Cause Analysis were sent for transparency to the > community. this is a good thing to ask for; and i expect that this will be made available, as was the RFO after the last incident. however, any RFO also includes a ?how are we going to make sure that this is not going to happen again? part. that bit actually takes time for analysis, planning, and, sign-off. if anything, *this* is the part that you want afrinic to actually spend time and effort on, rather than simply whipping out a half-assed response to an outage. so, it?s reasonable to believe that *this* part of the report, isn?t necessarily complete. yet. however, if you prefer to fit into the current climate .. .. maybe the BoD is still debating whether to release .. > I am surprised that the Infrastructure Unit Manager, Mr Cedric MBEYET > turned a deaf ear and did not learnt his lesson from the last incident > where RPKI services were down. if you read the outage incident from the last time, you _should_ be able to figure out that an incident that occurred previously, occurred in mauritius, and, is, in no way, related to thursday?s incident in johannesburg. which is in a different city. thousands of kilometres away. the golden hint _should_ have been, that last time around, it was a certificate renewal that failed; which won?t impact afrinic?s website, or whois services, or .. that were not available now. unless, you have direct evidence that they are related. in which case, for transparency, you should release that, eh? > Instead of taking care of Afrinic services, the current board of > directors > is busy hiding public document from its members. the BoD is not meant to run afrinic operations; they have enough to do. whilst i share your distaste for their actions, in reading some of the shocking revelations that are emerging in other threads, this, at least, is not something you should be equating to the BoD. read the RFO when it?s released; and, if you think there?s something that?s glaringly poorly done, then, feel free to point it out. posturing, without data, is just poor form. --n. network engineer (retired) ps. btw, even with almost 4h of outage, depending on what you?re measuring, afrinic are still on track for 99.9% uptime, even if there?s a second 4h outage this year. pps. i happen to know that afrinic *does* have at least one copy of a disaster recovery plan. i am somewhat still familiar with the contents of this, and, given the nature of what is involved in activating that (and then, reverting) in cedrick?s shoes, i would have made the same call for a 4h outage. you?re free to disagree. From comm-announce at afrinic.net Mon Jun 3 06:10:52 2019 From: comm-announce at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 10:10:52 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] AFRINIC Services outage May 30, 2019 - post mortem report Message-ID: Dear colleagues, On May 30, 2019 AFRINIC services faced a major outage. At 14:29 MUT on that same day, AFRINIC NOC team started receiving alert about service unavailability and degradation. The team reacted instantly to identify the root cause of the alerts and restore services. Few minutes later, communication was sent to inform our community and our fellow RIR on the ongoing outage. NOC team also proceed to activate counter measure and allow some critical services to be restored from another location. Upon further investigation we determined that all AFRINIC?s equipment at our main data centre in Johannesburg had lost power. The issue was fixed with the help of our hosting partner Internet Solution which team was, once the problem was identified, quick to respond and provide a remediation to our outage. It is unfortunate that this incident happened while the AFRINIC infrastructure enhancement plan is still in his implementation phase, but our community can rest assure that AFRINIC is moving toward its goal to provide resilience to AFRINIC infrastructure. Once again, we thank our community for the support and encouragement while we go through this unfortunate issue. ??????????. Panne des services AFRINIC le 30 mai 2019 - rapport post mortem Chers coll?gues, Le 30 mai 2019, les services AFRINIC ont fait face ? une panne majeure. Le m?me jour, ? 14 h 29 MUT, l??quipe technique d?AFRINIC a commenc? ? recevoir une alerte concernant l?indisponibilit? et la d?gradation du service. L'?quipe a imm?diatement r?agi pour identifier la cause premi?re des alertes et restaurer les services. Quelques minutes plus tard, une communication a ?t? envoy?e pour informer notre communaut? et nos coll?gues RIR de la panne en cours. L??quipe technique s?active ?galement ? prendre les mesures n?cessaires afin de et permettre ? certains services critiques d??tre restaur?s ? partir d?un autre emplacement. Apr?s une enqu?te plus approfondie, nous avons constat? que tous les ?quipements d?AFRINIC situ?s dans notre principal centre de donn?es ? Johannesburg avaient perdu leur alimentation. Le probl?me a ?t? r?solu avec l?aide de notre partenaire d?h?bergement Internet Solution, qui, une fois le probl?me identifi?, a ?t? rapide ? r?agir et ? apporter une solution ? notre probl?me. Il est regrettable que cet incident se soit produit alors que le plan d'am?lioration de l'infrastructure d'AFRINIC en est encore ? sa phase d'impl?mentation, mais notre communaut? peut ?tre assur?e qu'AFRINIC s'achemine vers son objectif de fournir une r?silience ? son infrastructure. Une fois encore, nous remercions notre communaut? pour le soutien et les encouragements apport?s face ? cette situation regrettable. From sm+af at afrinic.net Mon Jun 3 08:45:58 2019 From: sm+af at afrinic.net (S. Moonesamy) Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2019 01:45:58 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude (off-topic) In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <8671312b-793a-861f-31f1-6d9d682fb893@posix.co.za> <41c382a1-8acc-b521-8480-de0e84272748@geier.ne.tz>

Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20190602234645.0d428f98@elandnews.com> Dear Andrew, At 04:32 AM 31-05-2019, Andrew Alston wrote: > * The members in question that released > information did it in their capacity as board > members and would have received that information under that capacity. > This is not true ? read the court papers ? > each member was a ra respondent to the court > filing in their personal capacities ? they were > directly served the papers in their own nnames > ? the very first thing in that filing is SM vs long list of names> I was the director who filed the application. The respondents were the persons who were listed as directors at the time of the filing and Afrinic Ltd. I disclosed conflict of interest when the matter was on the agenda of a meeting and requested to be excused from the related discussions. It was not clear whether the documents which were filed could be put online as they were not available on the web site of the Supreme Court. There are laws, e.g. the ICT Act, which might be relevant. This is not the first legal case which I had to deal with as part of my duties as director. Is there any concern about the outcome of the case? Regards, S. Moonesamy -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From iyedigoma at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 19:00:46 2019 From: iyedigoma at gmail.com (Iyedi Goma) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 20:00:46 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Commencement of the public comments period for the 2019 Board elections Message-ID: Dear all The 2019 Nomination Committee (NOMCOM) informs the community that the final list of candidates for the Board election has been published and hereby announces the opening of the public comments period. Candidate Slate: https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-board-election-2019 Northern Africa (Seat 1): Leghris Cherkaoui Youssef Habib Western Africa (Seat 2): Adedokun Adewale Emmanuel Ly Ousmane Southern Africa (Seat 5): Mpisane Vika William Eastern Africa (Seat 6): Nkusi Robert Ford Non regional (Seat 7): Eshun Benjamin Adzenyamebeye Ojedeji Oluwaseun Samson NOMCOM used its best effort to attract a satisfactory number of individuals to stand as candidates including extension of the initial nomination period for the Board elections. Significant hurdles were however encountered in the implementation of the due diligence procedure, causing some delays throught the election timeline, resulting in, among others, having a shorter public comment period. NOMCOM apologizes for these delays and would like to request the indulgence of the community. Best regards Serge-Parfait Goma AFRINIC 2019nomcom Chair -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com Mon Jun 3 19:38:24 2019 From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 19:38:24 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Commencement of the public comments period for the 2019 Board elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: While we thank the Nomcom for the publication of slate ? we note that 1. This has not gone to the members list who are the ones who carry the vote 2. A special resolution has been tabled that will give the members the right to decide to accept this delay or reject it ? that special resolution must be heard ? those are the rules ? as clearly set out in the bylaws Andrew From: Iyedi Goma Date: Monday, 3 June 2019 at 22:02 To: General Discussions of AFRINIC Cc: 2019 NomCom Subject: [Community-Discuss] Commencement of the public comments period for the 2019 Board elections Dear all The 2019 Nomination Committee (NOMCOM) informs the community that the final list of candidates for the Board election has been published and hereby announces the opening of the public comments period. Candidate Slate: https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-board-election-2019 Northern Africa (Seat 1): Leghris Cherkaoui Youssef Habib Western Africa (Seat 2): Adedokun Adewale Emmanuel Ly Ousmane Southern Africa (Seat 5): Mpisane Vika William Eastern Africa (Seat 6): Nkusi Robert Ford Non regional (Seat 7): Eshun Benjamin Adzenyamebeye Ojedeji Oluwaseun Samson NOMCOM used its best effort to attract a satisfactory number of individuals to stand as candidates including extension of the initial nomination period for the Board elections. Significant hurdles were however encountered in the implementation of the due diligence procedure, causing some delays throught the election timeline, resulting in, among others, having a shorter public comment period. NOMCOM apologizes for these delays and would like to request the indulgence of the community. Best regards Serge-Parfait Goma AFRINIC 2019nomcom Chair -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From comm-announce at afrinic.net Mon Jun 3 19:44:26 2019 From: comm-announce at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 23:44:26 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee Message-ID: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> Dear colleagues, On behalf of the NomCom2019, AFRINIC is pleased to announce the following final candidate slate for the open seat on the AFRINIC Governance Committee elections: Governance Committee ? Ntumba Kayemba Full candidate information has been published at https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 The community (and members) are hereby invited to view candidate details and express any comments about the suitability of the candidates for the Governance committee position using the comment section at the URLs above. Election will be held during the Annual General Members' Meeting (AGMM) to be held in Kampala on 20 June 2019. More information is available at: https://afrinic.net/election-process For any queries or clarification, please contact the nominations committee by email to nomcom2019[at]afrinic.net ?????????. Annonce des candidats pour l'election au comit? de gouvernance Au nom du Nomcom 2019, AFRINIC a le plaisir d?annoncer la liste finale des candidats pour election au sein du comit? de gouvernance. Comit? de gouvernance ? Ntumba Kayemba Plus d?informations sur les candidats sont publi?es ici: https://www.afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 La communaut? (et les membres) sont invit?s ? voir les d?tails des candidats et ? formuler des commentaires sur les qualit?s personnelles des candidats pour le poste au comit? de gouvernance en utilisant la section des commentaires sur les URL ci-dessus. L'?lection aura lieu lors de l'Assembl?e g?n?rale annuelle des membres (AGMM) qui se tiendra ? Kampala le 20 juin 2019. Plus d'informations sont disponibles sur: https://afrinic.net/election-process Pour toute question ou clarification, veuillez contacter le comit? de nomination par courriel ? nomcom2019 [at] afrinic.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 20:12:25 2019 From: benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com (Benjamin Ledoh) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 20:12:25 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Hi Sander, Last week Monday, you made an assertion concerning the micromanagement of AFRINIC organization. When I asked you to point out where the micromanagement is in the minutes, you rather responded that ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away? and referring me to textbook for example of micromanagement. When I asked you to prove your hasty generalization ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, you disappeared, and no answer never come. It stands now there is no way you can justify because the ?micromanagement? you are accusing the board to indulge in is not true. There is no where it is on the minutes one can point out the micromanagement you are talking about. Rather your it is obvious that your intention is to praise the CEO and whoever is supporting him as a ?good guy? and the other members of the board who trying to enforce procedure as ?bad guys?. Moreover, your untrue ?micromanagement? has open gate to those who want to drive the organization into crises are asking the resignation of the board. It is inappropriate or rather mischievous to accuse others base on ?FAKE NEWS? or LIES. Since you are calling for transparency, I am also for it. I think it is time to ask for the in extenso publication of the report that dealt with the disfunction within Afrinic organization after the allegations/accusations of sexual harassment that led to the resignation of the past immediate chairman of Afrinic Board. Transparency Requires!!! Benjiloh On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 12:50 PM Sander Steffann wrote: > Hello, > > I was just reading the board minutes at > https://www.afrinic.net/ast/pdf/2019-minutes/20190305-minutes.pdf and I > am surprised at the level of micro-management that CEO Alan Barrett has to > deal with. In those minutes both Alan and Seun Ojedeji seem to be > reprimanded for being open and transparent to this community. The summary > of those minutes show how the board has made it explicitly clear that the > CEO is to have no responsibility anymore towards this community. > > Therefore I would like to explicitly and publicly express my gratitude to > both Alan and Seun for their efforts to keep this community involved in > Afrinic matters in an open and transparent way. I feel this is a strong > requirement for keeping Afrinic respected and supported by both its members > and its community. > > Sincerely, > Sander > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon Jun 3 20:14:54 2019 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 23:14:54 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <8685662F-657A-4B35-8073-4BA8EC0DEDF4@liquidtelecom.com> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> <8685662F-657A-4B35-8073-4BA8EC0DEDF4@liquidtelecom.com> Message-ID: Hi Andrew During discussions many suggestions/ideas, are said and the whole idea of the discussions is to arrive at a decision by listening to other board members. In fact the outcome of these discussions and the most important outcomes of the board meetings are the crafted resolutions. Therefore when we start scrutinizing minute by minute what individual board members say or suggest in discussions we are now entering mind control territory. There is nothing abnormal with what transpired in the discussions in those minutes unless of course if you want to make us foolishly believe that an individual board member must not suggest a subjective idea which a collective group can determine through a discussion if what was a subjective view point becomes an objective viewpoint. That whole discussion was perfectly normal and the conclusion of the minutes indicate as such. There was no NDA violation and the was a call for the board to find better ways to cohesively work together including improving communication between themselves as relates with the management of the organization in a more corporate structured manner. There is therefore no reasonable cause to call out for the resignations of the board members and I fully support the board as they continue carrying out their mandate. Cheers, Noah On Sat, 1 Jun 2019, 00:08 Andrew Alston, wrote: > Thank you Alan, > > > > Now ? I would like to break this down a bit ? firstly ? every directory is > signatory to this document ? and by signing it ? have acknowledged ? under > their own hand ? their knowledge of its contents. There can be no claim > that the contents of this document once signed by a director are not known. > > > > Now ? with that said ? let us look at what the NDA said ? wording relevant > to this is highlighted: > > > > *1. I understand that certain information about AfriNIC is confidential, > which is information not previously published or otherwise disclosed to the > public and which relates to but is not limited to the following: * > > > > Now ? there can be no question that the information in said documents were > disclosed to the public. The court had the documents ? the courts ? are a > public entity ? judges ? are public servants. To add further weight ? I > point to the fact that resolution 201411.211 states: *However, > information disclosed by the Board to third parties not under NDA to the > Board is no longer confidential and is deemed to be in the public domain.* > > > > So ? it is absolutely beyond dispute that those court documents were > public information. It is absolutely beyond dispute that every director > had to know the definition of confidential ? they signed the NDA. > Therefore ? logic states ? that any director making a claim of NDA > violation or claiming contractual violation in breach of the NDA was > bringing a motion that he *KNEW* was both frivolous and without any merit > whatsoever. > > > > Now ? let us look beyond the bylaws at the companies act specifically > section 143 entitled ?Duties of directors to act in good faith and in best > interests of the company? > > > > Section 143.(1).(c) states: *exercise their powers honestly in good faith > in the best interests of the company and for the respective purposes for > which such powers are explicitly or impliedly conferred;* > > > > Now ? since it can be CLEARLY established that the power to bring charges > of NDA violation and violation of contract were exercised in bad faith ? > considering the full knowledge of said director under his own signature > that the information was not ? and could not be ? covered under the NDA ? > at the VERY least one director is in, at least in my mind, in clear > violation of this clause and his fiduciary duties as a director. > Furthermore ? while perhaps more tenuous an argument ? I would argue that > the chair ? knowing full well that the charges being brought were frivolous > and in bad faith (on the same basis that the charges made by Serge were in > bad faith) acted contrary to the best interests of the company by allowing > these charges to be heard ? and published ? showing the world a completely > dysfunctional board acting in bad faith. > > > > So ? while I stand by my statements that I believe the board as a whole > should resign ? particularly in light of the fact that not a single > director objected to the charges brought and the fact that the meeting was > being held in the first place ? thereby lending credibility to a clear cut > act of bad faith ? and therefore also acting against the best interests of > the company ? I need to state ? that this in particular applies both the > Chair and Serge Ilunga ? both of whom in my mind CLEARLY violated the > companies act and their fiduciary duties as is clearly documented in those > minutes. > > > > Hence ? I reiterate my call for the resignation of the directors. > > > > Thanks > > > > Andrew > > > > *From: *Alan Barrett > *Date: *Friday, 31 May 2019 at 20:55 > *To: *General Discussions of AFRINIC > *Cc: *AFRINIC Board of Directors' List > *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude > > > > > > > On 28 May 2019, at 14:49, Frank Habicht wrote: > > > > Dear AfriNIC board members, > > > > reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion > > items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members > > are to adhere to. > > > > Can you share the document please? > > The Board NDA has been published at < > https://afrinic.net/board/board-documents> > > Regards, > 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 sander at steffann.nl Mon Jun 3 20:21:42 2019 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 22:21:42 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> Message-ID: <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> Hi Benjamin, > When I asked you to prove your hasty generalization ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, you disappeared, and no answer never come. It stands now there is no way you can justify because the ?micromanagement? you are accusing the board to indulge in is not true. No, if you can't see any micromanagement in the minutes then there is nothing I can say to convince you, so I just gave up trying. Anything I say would not help this discussion any further, so it is more appropriate to stay silent. Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From owen at delong.com Mon Jun 3 23:30:08 2019 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 16:30:08 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> <8685662F-657A-4B35-8073-4BA8EC0DEDF4@liquidtelecom.com> Message-ID: > On Jun 3, 2019, at 13:14 , Noah wrote: > > Hi Andrew > > During discussions many suggestions/ideas, are said and the whole idea of the discussions is to arrive at a decision by listening to other board members. In fact the outcome of these discussions and the most important outcomes of the board meetings are the crafted resolutions. Sure, but there certainly ought to be a reasonable expectation that an accusation against another board member which is factually baseless and involves a claim of violation of an agreement which makes it perfectly clear that the conduct in question _IS_ permitted would not be permitted in such a body. As Andrew pointed out? Every member of the board signed the document in question and should, therefore, be familiar with its content. As Andrew pointed out, the document in question specifically allows for board members to further discuss and disseminate information of a public nature. As Andrew pointed out, the document shared with the community was a public document. > Therefore when we start scrutinizing minute by minute what individual board members say or suggest in discussions we are now entering mind control territory. When the board takes such a provocative action by acting in bad faith against one of its own, the community has a duty to scrutinize the boards actions. Indeed, the community has a broad responsibility to oversee the actions of the board and ensure responsible governance and accountability of the board to the members and the community. Failing to review and comment on the minutes in question would be failing in that responsibility. > There is nothing abnormal with what transpired in the discussions in those minutes unless of course if you want to make us foolishly believe that an individual board member must not suggest a subjective idea which a collective group can determine through a discussion if what was a subjective view point becomes an objective viewpoint. Sadly, I think you may be right that it may not be abnormal for board members to act in bad faith against other board members. However, I do not believe that means we should continue to tolerate it. Without wading into your awkward sentence about subjective and objective, I will point out that objectively, the facts are as Andrew stated them? 1. Every board member should be familiar with the terms of the NDA. 2. The NDA specifically allows board members to publicly share information which is already public. 3. The document shared by the board members in question was, by definition already public. All of these are objective facts. Not subjective. Bringing a motion against a board member claiming that the action in question violated the NDA is, therefore, objectively an act of bad faith. > That whole discussion was perfectly normal and the conclusion of the minutes indicate as such. There was no NDA violation and the was a call for the board to find better ways to cohesively work together including improving communication between themselves as relates with the management of the organization in a more corporate structured manner. There remains in the minutes a claim that the CEO should not have published the document without board approval. This claim is patently absurd and the fact that you would call it normal is almost as disturbing as the fact that the board came to that irrational conclusion. > There is therefore no reasonable cause to call out for the resignations of the board members and I fully support the board as they continue carrying out their mandate. A board member brought a serious accusation against another board member in objective and clear bad faith and you do not feel that this warrants a call for that board member?s resignation? I suppose here we get into subjective territory, but I believe that board members should at the very least be encouraged to limit accusations to those which can be backed up by facts and which are not so obviously specious in their origins. I think it is unreasonable and unwise to tolerate such conduct from board members. The fact that the board ultimately came to the correct conclusion does not justify the initial acts of bad faith which initiated the discussion in question. Owen > > > Cheers, > Noah > > On Sat, 1 Jun 2019, 00:08 Andrew Alston, > wrote: > Thank you Alan, > > > > Now ? I would like to break this down a bit ? firstly ? every directory is signatory to this document ? and by signing it ? have acknowledged ? under their own hand ? their knowledge of its contents. There can be no claim that the contents of this document once signed by a director are not known. > > > > Now ? with that said ? let us look at what the NDA said ? wording relevant to this is highlighted: > > > > 1. I understand that certain information about AfriNIC is confidential, which is information not previously published or otherwise disclosed to the public and which relates to but is not limited to the following: > > > > Now ? there can be no question that the information in said documents were disclosed to the public. The court had the documents ? the courts ? are a public entity ? judges ? are public servants. To add further weight ? I point to the fact that resolution 201411.211 states: However, information disclosed by the Board to third parties not under NDA to the Board is no longer confidential and is deemed to be in the public domain. > > > > So ? it is absolutely beyond dispute that those court documents were public information. It is absolutely beyond dispute that every director had to know the definition of confidential ? they signed the NDA. Therefore ? logic states ? that any director making a claim of NDA violation or claiming contractual violation in breach of the NDA was bringing a motion that he KNEW was both frivolous and without any merit whatsoever. > > > > Now ? let us look beyond the bylaws at the companies act specifically section 143 entitled ?Duties of directors to act in good faith and in best interests of the company? > > > > Section 143.(1).(c) states: exercise their powers honestly in good faith in the best interests of the company and for the respective purposes for which such powers are explicitly or impliedly conferred; > > > > Now ? since it can be CLEARLY established that the power to bring charges of NDA violation and violation of contract were exercised in bad faith ? considering the full knowledge of said director under his own signature that the information was not ? and could not be ? covered under the NDA ? at the VERY least one director is in, at least in my mind, in clear violation of this clause and his fiduciary duties as a director. Furthermore ? while perhaps more tenuous an argument ? I would argue that the chair ? knowing full well that the charges being brought were frivolous and in bad faith (on the same basis that the charges made by Serge were in bad faith) acted contrary to the best interests of the company by allowing these charges to be heard ? and published ? showing the world a completely dysfunctional board acting in bad faith. > > > > So ? while I stand by my statements that I believe the board as a whole should resign ? particularly in light of the fact that not a single director objected to the charges brought and the fact that the meeting was being held in the first place ? thereby lending credibility to a clear cut act of bad faith ? and therefore also acting against the best interests of the company ? I need to state ? that this in particular applies both the Chair and Serge Ilunga ? both of whom in my mind CLEARLY violated the companies act and their fiduciary duties as is clearly documented in those minutes. > > > > Hence ? I reiterate my call for the resignation of the directors. > > > > Thanks > > > > Andrew > > > > From: Alan Barrett > > Date: Friday, 31 May 2019 at 20:55 > To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > > Cc: AFRINIC Board of Directors' List > > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude > > > > > > > On 28 May 2019, at 14:49, Frank Habicht > wrote: > > > > Dear AfriNIC board members, > > > > reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion > > items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members > > are to adhere to. > > > > Can you share the document please? > > The Board NDA has been published at > > > Regards, > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From owen at delong.com Mon Jun 3 23:32:45 2019 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 16:32:45 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> Message-ID: <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> Given that the none-of-the-above option has been removed from AfriNIC elections, should not the NomCom have a mandate to seek at least two candidates for any position before declaring a final slate? Otherwise, this basically gives the NomCom the authority to appoint members of the governance committee (and other bodies such as the board). Owen > On Jun 3, 2019, at 12:44 , AFRINIC Communication wrote: > > Dear colleagues, > > On behalf of the NomCom2019, AFRINIC is pleased to announce the following final candidate slate for the open seat on the AFRINIC Governance Committee elections: > > Governance Committee > > > ? Ntumba Kayemba > > Full candidate information has been published at https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 > > The community (and members) are hereby invited to view candidate details and express any comments about the suitability of the candidates for the Governance committee position using the comment section at the URLs above. > Election will be held during the Annual General Members' Meeting (AGMM) to be held in Kampala on 20 June 2019. > More information is available at: https://afrinic.net/election-process > > For any queries or clarification, please contact the nominations committee by email to nomcom2019[at]afrinic.net > > ?????????. > > Annonce des candidats pour l'election au comit? de gouvernance > > Au nom du Nomcom 2019, AFRINIC a le plaisir d?annoncer la liste finale des candidats pour election au sein du comit? de gouvernance. > > Comit? de gouvernance > > ? Ntumba Kayemba > > Plus d?informations sur les candidats sont publi?es ici: https://www.afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 > > La communaut? (et les membres) sont invit?s ? voir les d?tails des candidats et ? formuler des commentaires sur les qualit?s personnelles des candidats pour le poste au comit? de gouvernance en utilisant la section des commentaires sur les URL ci-dessus. > > L'?lection aura lieu lors de l'Assembl?e g?n?rale annuelle des membres (AGMM) qui se tiendra ? Kampala le 20 juin 2019. > > Plus d'informations sont disponibles sur: https://afrinic.net/election-process > > Pour toute question ou clarification, veuillez contacter le comit? de nomination par courriel ? nomcom2019 [at] afrinic.net _______________________________________________ > 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 Jun 4 04:32:19 2019 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 07:32:19 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> <8685662F-657A-4B35-8073-4BA8EC0DEDF4@liquidtelecom.com>

Message-ID: Owen Selective Memory......... If we are going to throw around the narrative of folks on the board acting acting in bad faith, may I remind some of the members castigating the board in defense of a respectable employee who chose to resign from their position for reasons unknown to all of us but are now using the specific board minutes to go after the board for suspiciously other unknown reasons, about the history of the so called mighty NDA. If we remember correctly recent events dating back a couple of years ago when the whole breach of NDA issue surfaced before members and the community, you will realize that one of the vocal members here used the NDA to defend what I would probably call the most unethical boardroom behaviors and tactics a few years ago from what we learned as a community. In fact the board chair at the time had reducted board minutes and presented to the community what was purely misinformation in the name of the NDA. Two Board members at the time acted against this and released the unreducted minutes to the community. A number of board members called for the two to resign so as to make a statement to the community which they did and years later we came to learn that the same folks who led the call for resignation of directors, years later did exactly the same thing of releasing information that the board had not yet decided to release. The issue of the information being public should therefore not be used here because the community had been told that the information was public and they should be able to find it. As some have mentioned already, we all work or belong to communities where some rules are outwardly out of tune. But we work to change them and not to manipulate them. I have not read anywhere why the current CEO decided to resign and I obviously have no idea about his reasons. It is not the first time an AFRINIC CEO has resigned and I can't seem to understand all these attacks I have seen towards the board as I catch up with all the emails that have been flying all over the place. PS: The role of the CEO is not a lifetime role nor is the role of board member. We have prescribed processes of changing these roles with AfriNIC continuing to stand tall.The outgoing CEO is a highly respected member of this community and instead of us celebrating his tenure, members are looking at board minutes to taint his work for their own reasons. It's as if every year as we head into the AGMM for the past couple of years, we see the same members of the community come in to attack the institution of the board with the worst attack from the same members of this community in Senegal last year. I really ask that we cease and desist................ My 2 bit coins Noah On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Owen DeLong wrote: > > > On Jun 3, 2019, at 13:14 , Noah wrote: > > Hi Andrew > > During discussions many suggestions/ideas, are said and the whole idea of > the discussions is to arrive at a decision by listening to other board > members. In fact the outcome of these discussions and the most important > outcomes of the board meetings are the crafted resolutions. > > > Sure, but there certainly ought to be a reasonable expectation that an > accusation against another board member which is factually baseless and > involves a claim of violation of an agreement which makes it perfectly > clear that the conduct in question _IS_ permitted would not be permitted in > such a body. > > As Andrew pointed out? Every member of the board signed the document in > question and should, therefore, be familiar with its content. > > As Andrew pointed out, the document in question specifically allows for > board members to further discuss and disseminate information of a public > nature. > > As Andrew pointed out, the document shared with the community was a public > document. > > Therefore when we start scrutinizing minute by minute what individual > board members say or suggest in discussions we are now entering mind > control territory. > > > When the board takes such a provocative action by acting in bad faith > against one of its own, the community has a duty to scrutinize the boards > actions. Indeed, the community has a broad responsibility to oversee the > actions of the board and ensure responsible governance and accountability > of the board to the members and the community. > > Failing to review and comment on the minutes in question would be failing > in that responsibility. > > There is nothing abnormal with what transpired in the discussions in those > minutes unless of course if you want to make us foolishly believe that an > individual board member must not suggest a subjective idea which a > collective group can determine through a discussion if what was a > subjective view point becomes an objective viewpoint. > > > Sadly, I think you may be right that it may not be abnormal for board > members to act in bad faith against other board members. However, I do not > believe that means we should continue to tolerate it. > > Without wading into your awkward sentence about subjective and objective, > I will point out that objectively, the facts are as Andrew stated them? > > 1. Every board member should be familiar with the terms of the NDA. > 2. The NDA specifically allows board members to publicly share > information which is already public. > 3. The document shared by the board members in question was, by > definition already public. > > All of these are objective facts. Not subjective. > > Bringing a motion against a board member claiming that the action in > question violated the NDA is, therefore, objectively an act of bad faith. > > That whole discussion was perfectly normal and the conclusion of the > minutes indicate as such. There was no NDA violation and the was a call for > the board to find better ways to cohesively work together including > improving communication between themselves as relates with the management > of the organization in a more corporate structured manner. > > > There remains in the minutes a claim that the CEO should not have > published the document without board approval. This claim is patently > absurd and the fact that you would call it normal is almost as disturbing > as the fact that the board came to that irrational conclusion. > > There is therefore no reasonable cause to call out for the resignations of > the board members and I fully support the board as they continue carrying > out their mandate. > > > A board member brought a serious accusation against another board member > in objective and clear bad faith and you do not feel that this warrants a > call for that board member?s resignation? I suppose here we get into > subjective territory, but I believe that board members should at the very > least be encouraged to limit accusations to those which can be backed up by > facts and which are not so obviously specious in their origins. > > I think it is unreasonable and unwise to tolerate such conduct from board > members. The fact that the board ultimately came to the correct conclusion > does not justify the initial acts of bad faith which initiated the > discussion in question. > > Owen > > > > Cheers, > Noah > > On Sat, 1 Jun 2019, 00:08 Andrew Alston, > wrote: > >> Thank you Alan, >> >> >> >> Now ? I would like to break this down a bit ? firstly ? every directory >> is signatory to this document ? and by signing it ? have acknowledged ? >> under their own hand ? their knowledge of its contents. There can be no >> claim that the contents of this document once signed by a director are not >> known. >> >> >> >> Now ? with that said ? let us look at what the NDA said ? wording >> relevant to this is highlighted: >> >> >> >> *1. I understand that certain information about AfriNIC is confidential, >> which is information not previously published or otherwise disclosed to the >> public and which relates to but is not limited to the following: * >> >> >> >> Now ? there can be no question that the information in said documents >> were disclosed to the public. The court had the documents ? the courts ? >> are a public entity ? judges ? are public servants. To add further weight ? >> I point to the fact that resolution 201411.211 states: *However, >> information disclosed by the Board to third parties not under NDA to the >> Board is no longer confidential and is deemed to be in the public domain.* >> >> >> >> So ? it is absolutely beyond dispute that those court documents were >> public information. It is absolutely beyond dispute that every director >> had to know the definition of confidential ? they signed the NDA. >> Therefore ? logic states ? that any director making a claim of NDA >> violation or claiming contractual violation in breach of the NDA was >> bringing a motion that he *KNEW* was both frivolous and without any >> merit whatsoever. >> >> >> >> Now ? let us look beyond the bylaws at the companies act specifically >> section 143 entitled ?Duties of directors to act in good faith and in best >> interests of the company? >> >> >> >> Section 143.(1).(c) states: *exercise their powers honestly in good >> faith in the best interests of the company and for the respective purposes >> for which such powers are explicitly or impliedly conferred;* >> >> >> >> Now ? since it can be CLEARLY established that the power to bring charges >> of NDA violation and violation of contract were exercised in bad faith ? >> considering the full knowledge of said director under his own signature >> that the information was not ? and could not be ? covered under the NDA ? >> at the VERY least one director is in, at least in my mind, in clear >> violation of this clause and his fiduciary duties as a director. >> Furthermore ? while perhaps more tenuous an argument ? I would argue that >> the chair ? knowing full well that the charges being brought were frivolous >> and in bad faith (on the same basis that the charges made by Serge were in >> bad faith) acted contrary to the best interests of the company by allowing >> these charges to be heard ? and published ? showing the world a completely >> dysfunctional board acting in bad faith. >> >> >> >> So ? while I stand by my statements that I believe the board as a whole >> should resign ? particularly in light of the fact that not a single >> director objected to the charges brought and the fact that the meeting was >> being held in the first place ? thereby lending credibility to a clear cut >> act of bad faith ? and therefore also acting against the best interests of >> the company ? I need to state ? that this in particular applies both the >> Chair and Serge Ilunga ? both of whom in my mind CLEARLY violated the >> companies act and their fiduciary duties as is clearly documented in those >> minutes. >> >> >> >> Hence ? I reiterate my call for the resignation of the directors. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> *From: *Alan Barrett >> *Date: *Friday, 31 May 2019 at 20:55 >> *To: *General Discussions of AFRINIC >> *Cc: *AFRINIC Board of Directors' List >> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude >> >> >> >> >> >> > On 28 May 2019, at 14:49, Frank Habicht wrote: >> > >> > Dear AfriNIC board members, >> > >> > reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion >> > items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members >> > are to adhere to. >> > >> > Can you share the document please? >> >> The Board NDA has been published at < >> https://afrinic.net/board/board-documents> >> >> Regards, >> 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 > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hrobert at africacert.org Tue Jun 4 04:53:55 2019 From: hrobert at africacert.org (Jean-Robert Hountomey) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 23:53:55 -0500 Subject: [Community-Discuss] updates on cert track during AIS In-Reply-To: <1559589912.15753546@apps.rackspace.com> References: <1559589912.15753546@apps.rackspace.com> Message-ID: <0231fdc5-9791-a5e2-5fbf-fa32422e8642@africacert.org> Dear Colleagues, We have few places available for the CERT track part of AfricaCERT 15 Capacity building workshop that will be held during AIS in Kampala. We welcome Incident Response and security teams at various stages of their maturity curve. If you are interested and know someone interested Please check information at: https://www.internetsummit.africa/en/ And reach out to Secretariat for details and conditions. Contact: secretariat(at)africacert.org Program includes following modules: . Bootcamp: CSIRT Creation and Management . CSIRT Maturity Framework: Stimulating the development and maturity enhancement of CSIRTs . Securing Webserver. . Opensource Intelligence . Incident response workshop (2 Days): Threat landscape, awareness and community building CSIRT organisation and legal framework, working with Policy Makers and Critical Infra Operators, Communication (internal, external, communication channels and methods), Incident response taxonomies and escalation paths, Exercises skills validation, procedures and Supervision . AfricaCERT Framework. Thank you. Regards. AfricaCERT -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From geier at geier.ne.tz Tue Jun 4 05:34:58 2019 From: geier at geier.ne.tz (Frank Habicht) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 08:34:58 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <3d132f50-3643-6ce1-1289-396bd645debd@geier.ne.tz> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <3d132f50-3643-6ce1-1289-396bd645debd@geier.ne.tz> Message-ID: To update: On 28/05/2019 16:38, Frank Habicht wrote: > any commitment to do that would probably gain the candidate some extra > votes.... > ;-) this does not apply any more. Frank From owen at delong.com Tue Jun 4 05:39:25 2019 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 22:39:25 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <1775bf5e-215e-f4b4-f5d9-ff7990e8a4cb@geier.ne.tz> <28D066F2-4671-4DB2-8535-057FA7C66C2B@afrinic.net> <8685662F-657A-4B35-8073-4BA8EC0DEDF4@liquidtelecom.com>

Message-ID: <2D6D3D6E-8E3F-4238-BDF1-0CB203B30FAF@delong.com> > On Jun 3, 2019, at 21:32 , Noah wrote: > > Owen > > Selective Memory??? Not deliberately so, but I will admit that from the vague and ambiguous description below, I am unable to reassemble a memory of what you are referring to. > If we are going to throw around the narrative of folks on the board acting acting in bad faith, may I remind some of the members castigating the board in defense of a respectable employee who chose to resign from their position for reasons unknown to all of us but are now using the specific board minutes to go after the board for suspiciously other unknown reasons, about the history of the so called mighty NDA. Can you translate this out of doublespeak and into facts? The specific board minutes are being used to castigate two specific board members which have been named (Serge Ilunga and Cristian Bope) because they acted in bad faith bringing two motions to criticize fellow board members for disclosing information which was already public, allegedly because it violated the NDA since the board had (possibly ex post facto, though the timeline is admittedly not 100% clear from the minutes) decided (for reasons passing understanding) to delay publication. > If we remember correctly recent events dating back a couple of years ago when the whole breach of NDA issue surfaced before members and the community, you will realize that one of the vocal members here used the NDA to defend what I would probably call the most unethical boardroom behaviors and tactics a few years ago from what we learned as a community. In fact the board chair at the time had reducted board minutes and presented to the community what was purely misinformation in the name of the NDA. If you?re referring to Andrew?s various tirades claiming he was unable to disclose details due to board NDA, then I will let him answer for that alone. While I have found myself agreeing with Andrew about many things, I have never supported his particular style of communication, nor have I ever supported his unsubstantiated rants. > Two Board members at the time acted against this and released the unreducted minutes to the community. A number of board members called for the two to resign so as to make a statement to the community which they did and years later we came to learn that the same folks who led the call for resignation of directors, years later did exactly the same thing of releasing information that the board had not yet decided to release. In this particular case, the board members in question released material that WAS NOT PUBLIC prior to their disclosure. Do you not see the difference between material that is not already public and a document which is by definition a matter of public record? Is it really so hard to make this distinction? If you will recall, many of those same community members also called for the resignation of Sunday Folayan on the same basis. I won?t speak for the others, but at least in my case, I had to agree that selective enforcement is an unacceptable path. > The issue of the information being public should therefore not be used here because the community had been told that the information was public and they should be able to find it. As some have mentioned already, we all work or belong to communities where some rules are outwardly out of tune. But we work to change them and not to manipulate them. Once the information is public, the NDA specifically excludes it from any limitations of the NDA. Read the NDA? To whit: > I understand that certain information about AfriNIC is confidential, which is information not previously published or otherwise disclosed to the public and which relates to but is not limited to the following: > > (a) the operations of AfriNIC > > (b) the customers of AfriNIC; and > > (c) the financial, legal, technical and strategic matters relating to AfriNIC. > > 2. I understand that AfriNIC receives from other organisations detailed information; for example, about the internal network infrastructure, customers and development plans. Such information is provided to AfriNIC for the purpose of enabling AfriNIC to properly carry out its business; an organisation providing information to AfriNIC may consider much of that information to be of a confidential nature and that unauthorized disclosure of that confidential information to the public or its competitors could be harmful to the business of the organisation or its customers or to AfriNIC. Therefore such information is also considered by AfriNIC as confidential. > The very first sentence includes the clause ??which is information not previously published or otherwise disclosed to the public?? This makes the fact that the information was already public relevant because it is specifically excluded from the NDA at that point. > I have not read anywhere why the current CEO decided to resign and I obviously have no idea about his reasons. It is not the first time an AFRINIC CEO has resigned and I can't seem to understand all these attacks I have seen towards the board as I catch up with all the emails that have been flying all over the place. I have no knowledge of this, nor has it been a point in any of my arguments. You?ll have to ask those discussing that matter. > PS: The role of the CEO is not a lifetime role nor is the role of board member. We have prescribed processes of changing these roles with AfriNIC continuing to stand tall.The outgoing CEO is a highly respected member of this community and instead of us celebrating his tenure, members are looking at board minutes to taint his work for their own reasons. Again, I don?t see any relationship between this comment and anything I have said. I will point out that we also have a process for removal of board members who fail to meet their fiduciary responsibilities or otherwise act in a manner contrary to the good function of the company. These bad faith accusations are just such an example of a perfectly valid reason for the community to call said board members to account. > It's as if every year as we head into the AGMM for the past couple of years, we see the same members of the community come in to attack the institution of the board with the worst attack from the same members of this community in Senegal last year. I don?t recall personally making any attacks on the board last year other than criticizing their decision to reject the hearing of a particular motion at the AGMM. I believe that the board acted against the interests and desires of the community in doing so and I raised it as such. I would not call that an attack on the board, I would call that an argument in favor of good governance. I honestly am not sure whether the motion had merit, but I believe that the members should have been allowed to make that decision rather than having the board reject the idea of giving said members the opportunity to do so. > I really ask that we cease and desist?????. When I see the board or members of the board acting in a manner I feel is inappropriate to their roles and responsibilities, I will comment on it. Members of the community have a duty to hold the board accountable for its behavior in discharging the duties entrusted to them by the membership and by extension the community. I do not take this obligation lightly. I am not making personal attacks on particular board members because I favor or don?t favor the election results. I am commenting on malfeasance as I see it conducted by particular board members in this case based on the facts. You may like the board members in question or you may be tired of the community criticizing the board?s behavior. So be it. I am tired of the board?s consistent failure to live up to reasonable standards of conduct. I ask that the board cease and desist in so disappointing the community and violating our trust. I will assure you that when the board ends its campaign of misbehavior, I will stop vocally criticizing the board. > My 2 bit coins > Noah Hmmm? The original saying was ?My 2 cents?, value ?USD$0.02?. Two bitcoin are currently valued at approximately ?USD$15,889.64?. That?s quite some inflation you?ve built into your signature there. Owen > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 2:30 AM Owen DeLong > wrote: > > >> On Jun 3, 2019, at 13:14 , Noah > wrote: >> >> Hi Andrew >> >> During discussions many suggestions/ideas, are said and the whole idea of the discussions is to arrive at a decision by listening to other board members. In fact the outcome of these discussions and the most important outcomes of the board meetings are the crafted resolutions. > > Sure, but there certainly ought to be a reasonable expectation that an accusation against another board member which is factually baseless and involves a claim of violation of an agreement which makes it perfectly clear that the conduct in question _IS_ permitted would not be permitted in such a body. > > As Andrew pointed out? Every member of the board signed the document in question and should, therefore, be familiar with its content. > > As Andrew pointed out, the document in question specifically allows for board members to further discuss and disseminate information of a public nature. > > As Andrew pointed out, the document shared with the community was a public document. > >> Therefore when we start scrutinizing minute by minute what individual board members say or suggest in discussions we are now entering mind control territory. > > When the board takes such a provocative action by acting in bad faith against one of its own, the community has a duty to scrutinize the boards actions. Indeed, the community has a broad responsibility to oversee the actions of the board and ensure responsible governance and accountability of the board to the members and the community. > > Failing to review and comment on the minutes in question would be failing in that responsibility. > >> There is nothing abnormal with what transpired in the discussions in those minutes unless of course if you want to make us foolishly believe that an individual board member must not suggest a subjective idea which a collective group can determine through a discussion if what was a subjective view point becomes an objective viewpoint. > > Sadly, I think you may be right that it may not be abnormal for board members to act in bad faith against other board members. However, I do not believe that means we should continue to tolerate it. > > Without wading into your awkward sentence about subjective and objective, I will point out that objectively, the facts are as Andrew stated them? > > 1. Every board member should be familiar with the terms of the NDA. > 2. The NDA specifically allows board members to publicly share information which is already public. > 3. The document shared by the board members in question was, by definition already public. > > All of these are objective facts. Not subjective. > > Bringing a motion against a board member claiming that the action in question violated the NDA is, therefore, objectively an act of bad faith. > >> That whole discussion was perfectly normal and the conclusion of the minutes indicate as such. There was no NDA violation and the was a call for the board to find better ways to cohesively work together including improving communication between themselves as relates with the management of the organization in a more corporate structured manner. > > There remains in the minutes a claim that the CEO should not have published the document without board approval. This claim is patently absurd and the fact that you would call it normal is almost as disturbing as the fact that the board came to that irrational conclusion. > >> There is therefore no reasonable cause to call out for the resignations of the board members and I fully support the board as they continue carrying out their mandate. > > A board member brought a serious accusation against another board member in objective and clear bad faith and you do not feel that this warrants a call for that board member?s resignation? I suppose here we get into subjective territory, but I believe that board members should at the very least be encouraged to limit accusations to those which can be backed up by facts and which are not so obviously specious in their origins. > > I think it is unreasonable and unwise to tolerate such conduct from board members. The fact that the board ultimately came to the correct conclusion does not justify the initial acts of bad faith which initiated the discussion in question. > > Owen > >> >> >> Cheers, >> Noah >> >> On Sat, 1 Jun 2019, 00:08 Andrew Alston, > wrote: >> Thank you Alan, >> >> >> >> Now ? I would like to break this down a bit ? firstly ? every directory is signatory to this document ? and by signing it ? have acknowledged ? under their own hand ? their knowledge of its contents. There can be no claim that the contents of this document once signed by a director are not known. >> >> >> >> Now ? with that said ? let us look at what the NDA said ? wording relevant to this is highlighted: >> >> >> >> 1. I understand that certain information about AfriNIC is confidential, which is information not previously published or otherwise disclosed to the public and which relates to but is not limited to the following: >> >> >> >> Now ? there can be no question that the information in said documents were disclosed to the public. The court had the documents ? the courts ? are a public entity ? judges ? are public servants. To add further weight ? I point to the fact that resolution 201411.211 states: However, information disclosed by the Board to third parties not under NDA to the Board is no longer confidential and is deemed to be in the public domain. >> >> >> >> So ? it is absolutely beyond dispute that those court documents were public information. It is absolutely beyond dispute that every director had to know the definition of confidential ? they signed the NDA. Therefore ? logic states ? that any director making a claim of NDA violation or claiming contractual violation in breach of the NDA was bringing a motion that he KNEW was both frivolous and without any merit whatsoever. >> >> >> >> Now ? let us look beyond the bylaws at the companies act specifically section 143 entitled ?Duties of directors to act in good faith and in best interests of the company? >> >> >> >> Section 143.(1).(c) states: exercise their powers honestly in good faith in the best interests of the company and for the respective purposes for which such powers are explicitly or impliedly conferred; >> >> >> >> Now ? since it can be CLEARLY established that the power to bring charges of NDA violation and violation of contract were exercised in bad faith ? considering the full knowledge of said director under his own signature that the information was not ? and could not be ? covered under the NDA ? at the VERY least one director is in, at least in my mind, in clear violation of this clause and his fiduciary duties as a director. Furthermore ? while perhaps more tenuous an argument ? I would argue that the chair ? knowing full well that the charges being brought were frivolous and in bad faith (on the same basis that the charges made by Serge were in bad faith) acted contrary to the best interests of the company by allowing these charges to be heard ? and published ? showing the world a completely dysfunctional board acting in bad faith. >> >> >> >> So ? while I stand by my statements that I believe the board as a whole should resign ? particularly in light of the fact that not a single director objected to the charges brought and the fact that the meeting was being held in the first place ? thereby lending credibility to a clear cut act of bad faith ? and therefore also acting against the best interests of the company ? I need to state ? that this in particular applies both the Chair and Serge Ilunga ? both of whom in my mind CLEARLY violated the companies act and their fiduciary duties as is clearly documented in those minutes. >> >> >> >> Hence ? I reiterate my call for the resignation of the directors. >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> From: Alan Barrett > >> Date: Friday, 31 May 2019 at 20:55 >> To: General Discussions of AFRINIC > >> Cc: AFRINIC Board of Directors' List > >> Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude >> >> >> >> >> >> > On 28 May 2019, at 14:49, Frank Habicht > wrote: >> > >> > Dear AfriNIC board members, >> > >> > reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion >> > items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members >> > are to adhere to. >> > >> > Can you share the document please? >> >> The Board NDA has been published at > >> >> Regards, >> 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From saul at enetworks.co.za Tue Jun 4 07:22:45 2019 From: saul at enetworks.co.za (Saul Stein) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:22:45 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> Message-ID: <2e0a01d51aa6$59f66170$0de32450$@enetworks.co.za> hi I agree with Owen: the candidate list that AFRINIC has sent out for the new board in the upcoming elections in two weeks: https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-board-election-2019 Besides the fact that we are meant to have the list 30 days before the AGMM, there is are some very concerning issues: 1) There is only one candidate for the southern region 2) He has been suspended from his day job https://www.itweb.co.za/content/Olx4z7kgwwx756km as the CEO of ZADNA, basically the organisation that controls domains in .za. read the article and draw your own conclusions as to what is going on. 3) He is the only candidate that the NOMCOM have advertised 4) The NOMCOM have no requirement (my understanding) to say of there were any other candidates. 5) There is no longer an option to vote ?none of the above?, effectively giving the NOMCOM the opportunity to select Directors without the need for an election. (what are they supposed to do if there is only one volunteer? Catch 22, we need to be able to vote ?none of the above?) 6) From being suspended from his day job he now becomes a director of the debatably the most important internet organisation in Africa. Yes there is also only one candidate for the Eastern Africa as well. Again, without the ?none of the above? options and only 1 candidate, NOMCOM elects the Board of Directors. I understand the issue on ?none of the above? voting option when there are more than 1 candidate, but when there is only one candidate, not having it, if you have an unsuitable person standing alone, there is no way to keep him out. This makes no sense at all. Saul From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] Sent: 04 June 2019 01:33 AM To: AFRINIC Communication Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee Given that the none-of-the-above option has been removed from AfriNIC elections, should not the NomCom have a mandate to seek at least two candidates for any position before declaring a final slate? Otherwise, this basically gives the NomCom the authority to appoint members of the governance committee (and other bodies such as the board). Owen On Jun 3, 2019, at 12:44 , AFRINIC Communication < comm-announce at afrinic.net> wrote: Dear colleagues, On behalf of the NomCom2019, AFRINIC is pleased to announce the following final candidate slate for the open seat on the AFRINIC Governance Committee elections: Governance Committee ? Ntumba Kayemba Full candidate information has been published at https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 The community (and members) are hereby invited to view candidate details and express any comments about the suitability of the candidates for the Governance committee position using the comment section at the URLs above. Election will be held during the Annual General Members' Meeting (AGMM) to be held in Kampala on 20 June 2019. More information is available at: https://afrinic.net/election-process For any queries or clarification, please contact the nominations committee by email to nomcom2019[at] afrinic.net ?????????. Annonce des candidats pour l'election au comit? de gouvernance Au nom du Nomcom 2019, AFRINIC a le plaisir d?annoncer la liste finale des candidats pour election au sein du comit? de gouvernance. Comit? de gouvernance ? Ntumba Kayemba Plus d?informations sur les candidats sont publi?es ici: https://www.afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 La communaut? (et les membres) sont invit?s ? voir les d?tails des candidats et ? formuler des commentaires sur les qualit?s personnelles des candidats pour le poste au comit? de gouvernance en utilisant la section des commentaires sur les URL ci-dessus. L'?lection aura lieu lors de l'Assembl?e g?n?rale annuelle des membres (AGMM) qui se tiendra ? Kampala le 20 juin 2019. Plus d'informations sont disponibles sur: https://afrinic.net/election-process Pour toute question ou clarification, veuillez contacter le comit? de nomination par courriel ? nomcom2019 [at] afrinic.net _______________________________________________ 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 Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com Tue Jun 4 07:34:56 2019 From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 07:34:56 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: <2e0a01d51aa6$59f66170$0de32450$@enetworks.co.za> References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <2e0a01d51aa6$59f66170$0de32450$@enetworks.co.za> Message-ID: Saul, you are correct. However, there is an extension to this ? remember ? the board appoints the nomcom ? they are in effect ? a form of board committee. Furthermore the board approves the slate. Furthermore ? the board are the ones that unilaterally ? against many objections on these lists ? removed the none of the above option in the election procedure. Effectively ? by what they have done ? they have stripped the member base of their rights of self determination and the right to elect their own directors, and where choosing to do so ? they can put forward a single candidate ? and in effect ? unilaterally appoint that candidate. We do not know if there was more than one nomination ? and even if there wasn?t ? it still creates an untenable situation ? because we have no idea if there was or was not anything done in the background to ensure that situation could occur. I would argue very strongly that right now ? AfriNIC ? is in violation of everything that the RIR system stands for ? that is ? the bottom up ? community lead approach ? where we are guaranteed the right to elect our own leadership ? it has been stripped away ? and this ? is the final nail in the coffin for anyone who believes the fa?ade that this organization is bottom up under the current board ? because it is anything but. Please note: Since this is very much a member issue ? and in the interests of the community ? I have copied in the members list into this reply deliberately ? it affects both groups. Thanks Andrew From: Saul Stein Sent: Tuesday, 4 June 2019 10:23 To: Owen DeLong ; AFRINIC Communication Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee hi I agree with Owen: the candidate list that AFRINIC has sent out for the new board in the upcoming elections in two weeks: https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-board-election-2019 Besides the fact that we are meant to have the list 30 days before the AGMM, there is are some very concerning issues: 1. There is only one candidate for the southern region 2. He has been suspended from his day job https://www.itweb.co.za/content/Olx4z7kgwwx756km as the CEO of ZADNA, basically the organisation that controls domains in .za. read the article and draw your own conclusions as to what is going on. 3. He is the only candidate that the NOMCOM have advertised 4. The NOMCOM have no requirement (my understanding) to say of there were any other candidates. 5. There is no longer an option to vote ?none of the above?, effectively giving the NOMCOM the opportunity to select Directors without the need for an election. (what are they supposed to do if there is only one volunteer? Catch 22, we need to be able to vote ?none of the above?) 6. From being suspended from his day job he now becomes a director of the debatably the most important internet organisation in Africa. Yes there is also only one candidate for the Eastern Africa as well. Again, without the ?none of the above? options and only 1 candidate, NOMCOM elects the Board of Directors. I understand the issue on ?none of the above? voting option when there are more than 1 candidate, but when there is only one candidate, not having it, if you have an unsuitable person standing alone, there is no way to keep him out. This makes no sense at all. Saul From: Owen DeLong [mailto:owen at delong.com] Sent: 04 June 2019 01:33 AM To: AFRINIC Communication > Cc: community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee Given that the none-of-the-above option has been removed from AfriNIC elections, should not the NomCom have a mandate to seek at least two candidates for any position before declaring a final slate? Otherwise, this basically gives the NomCom the authority to appoint members of the governance committee (and other bodies such as the board). Owen On Jun 3, 2019, at 12:44 , AFRINIC Communication > wrote: Dear colleagues, On behalf of the NomCom2019, AFRINIC is pleased to announce the following final candidate slate for the open seat on the AFRINIC Governance Committee elections: Governance Committee ? Ntumba Kayemba Full candidate information has been published at https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 The community (and members) are hereby invited to view candidate details and express any comments about the suitability of the candidates for the Governance committee position using the comment section at the URLs above. Election will be held during the Annual General Members' Meeting (AGMM) to be held in Kampala on 20 June 2019. More information is available at: https://afrinic.net/election-process For any queries or clarification, please contact the nominations committee by email to nomcom2019[at]afrinic.net ?????????. Annonce des candidats pour l'election au comit? de gouvernance Au nom du Nomcom 2019, AFRINIC a le plaisir d?annoncer la liste finale des candidats pour election au sein du comit? de gouvernance. Comit? de gouvernance ? Ntumba Kayemba Plus d?informations sur les candidats sont publi?es ici: https://www.afrinic.net/candidate-slate-governance-committee-election-2019 La communaut? (et les membres) sont invit?s ? voir les d?tails des candidats et ? formuler des commentaires sur les qualit?s personnelles des candidats pour le poste au comit? de gouvernance en utilisant la section des commentaires sur les URL ci-dessus. L'?lection aura lieu lors de l'Assembl?e g?n?rale annuelle des membres (AGMM) qui se tiendra ? Kampala le 20 juin 2019. Plus d'informations sont disponibles sur: https://afrinic.net/election-process Pour toute question ou clarification, veuillez contacter le comit? de nomination par courriel ? nomcom2019 [at] afrinic.net _______________________________________________ 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 sander at steffann.nl Tue Jun 4 10:24:12 2019 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:24:12 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> Message-ID: <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl> Hi Owen, > Given that the none-of-the-above option has been removed from AfriNIC elections, should not the NomCom have a mandate to seek at least two candidates for any position before declaring a final slate? > > Otherwise, this basically gives the NomCom the authority to appoint members of the governance committee (and other bodies such as the board). And this build down to: the current "election" is not an election by any definition. I looked up the words in Merriam-Webster (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/election): Definition of election 1a: an act or process of electing 1b: the fact of being elected 2: predestination to eternal life 3: the right, power, or privilege of making a choice I don't think definition 2 is applicable here. The definitions applicable to the current situation are 1a and 3. Looking a bit further down that page we see: CHOICE, OPTION, ALTERNATIVE, PREFERENCE, SELECTION, ELECTION mean the act or opportunity of choosing or the thing chosen. CHOICE suggests the opportunity or privilege of choosing freely. OPTION implies a power to choose that is specifically granted or guaranteed. ALTERNATIVE implies a need to choose one and reject another possibility. PREFERENCE suggests a choice guided by one's judgment or predilections. SELECTION implies a range of choice. ELECTION implies an end or purpose which requires exercise of judgment. All of the applicable definitions require the ability (right) to freely choose. When there is no choice, there is no election. Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From sander at steffann.nl Tue Jun 4 10:29:32 2019 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 12:29:32 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl> References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Hi, > All of the applicable definitions require the ability (right) to freely choose. When there is no choice, there is no election. And to be perfectly clear on this: as there is no election, I believe this violates section 13.7(i) of the Afrinic bylaws, as those explicitly state: """ Except for the Chief Executive Officer, and subject to Articles 13.1O and 13.11, all other Directors shall be elected by Resource and Registered Members on the date of each Annual General Members' Meeting. """ No election -> no Directors Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Jun 4 10:35:59 2019 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 13:35:59 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl> Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 13:30 Sander Steffann, wrote: > Hi, > > > All of the applicable definitions require the ability (right) to freely > choose. When there is no choice, there is no election. > > And to be perfectly clear on this: as there is no election, I believe this > violates section 13.7(i) of the Afrinic bylaws, as those explicitly state: > > """ > Except for the Chief Executive Officer, and subject to Articles 13.1O and > 13.11, all other Directors shall be elected by Resource and Registered > Members on the date of each Annual General Members' Meeting. > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 """ > > No election -> no Directors > Board can appoint. > Cheers, > Sander > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com Tue Jun 4 10:53:13 2019 From: Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com (Andrew Alston) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 10:53:13 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: Noah, Section 13.8 exists in specific circumstance ? to fill a casual vacancy ? which is only valid until the date of the next election. So yes ? in the event of none of the above ? the board has the right to appoint for a limited period ? not a full 3 year term. Do I believe that is right? No ? but it is the rules. That however ? is very different from a 3 year forced appointment Andrew From: Noah Sent: Tuesday, 4 June 2019 13:36 To: Sander Steffann Cc: General Discussions of AFRINIC ; AFRINIC Communication Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 13:30 Sander Steffann, > wrote: Hi, > All of the applicable definitions require the ability (right) to freely choose. When there is no choice, there is no election. And to be perfectly clear on this: as there is no election, I believe this violates section 13.7(i) of the Afrinic bylaws, as those explicitly state: """ Except for the Chief Executive Officer, and subject to Articles 13.1O and 13.11, all other Directors shall be elected by Resource and Registered Members on the date of each Annual General Members' Meeting. Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 """ No election -> no Directors Board can appoint. Cheers, Sander _______________________________________________ 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.ledoh at gmail.com Tue Jun 4 10:55:34 2019 From: benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com (Benjamin Ledoh) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 10:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Hi Sander, It seems to me that you have not got my points well. I will rephrase them differently and give my last comments. Based on the minutes of the board, you sent an email accusing the board of micromanagement. When I asked you to point it out in the minutes, you directed me to textbook. I don't know whether the micromanagement you are referring to the AFRINIC Community is in textbook. When you claim that ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, I asked you to prove it. Since you cannot prove it, you disappeared. Facing your inability to substantiate your own claims, you are telling me that ?it is more appropriate to stay silent?. I thank you for this option and I ask you to extend it to the entire community since it will help us a lot in this community. In Yoruba land we say that ?when you don?t have fact to argue, wisdom suggests you keep quite.? Your silence would not give room to disruptive guys who want at all cost the opportunity to create confusion and crises in this community with the aims to destroy AFRINIC organization and community. Abide with your suggestion, it will be Great service to our community. Thank you, Benjiloh On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:21 PM Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi Benjamin, > > > When I asked you to prove your hasty generalization ?all responsibility > and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, you disappeared, and no > answer never come. It stands now there is no way you can justify because > the ?micromanagement? you are accusing the board to indulge in is not true. > > No, if you can't see any micromanagement in the minutes then there is > nothing I can say to convince you, so I just gave up trying. Anything I say > would not help this discussion any further, so it is more appropriate to > stay silent. > > Cheers, > Sander > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sander at steffann.nl Tue Jun 4 12:15:12 2019 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 14:15:12 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: Hi Noah, > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 When there is no candidate then the current director will be re-appointed. Appointed != Elected. >> No election -> no Directors > > Board can appoint. True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members though, and for a bottom-up community ending up with more appointed than elected board members would not be good. I have some stronger words on what my personal feeling is, but I'll leave those to your imagination :) Let's stick to the facts on this list. Cheers, Sander -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Tue Jun 4 12:46:28 2019 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:46:28 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 15:15 Sander Steffann, wrote: > Hi Noah, > > > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 > > When there is no candidate then the current director will be re-appointed. You missed the word "eligible" candidate! Nomcom has since slated eligible candidate and candidates with different slates having one or more candidate and candidates nominated. Appointed != Elected. > There are upcoming elections scheduled where we members will be casting votes for various candidates. > >> No election -> no Directors > > > > Board can appoint. > > True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. > > An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members though, and > for a bottom-up community ending up with more appointed than elected board > members would not be good. We have elections coming up soon and we intend to elect otherwise the board would have to appoint or reappoint as its within its powers. > Cheers, > Sander > Noah > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mark.tinka at seacom.mu Tue Jun 4 12:59:38 2019 From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 14:59:38 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [safnog] SAFNOG-5 Call for Papers In-Reply-To: <1559304228396.52251@safnog.net> References: <1559304228396.52251@safnog.net> Message-ID: FYI. Mark. -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [safnog] SAFNOG-5 Call for Papers Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 12:03:49 +0000 From: Portia Rabonda To: safnog at safnog.org Dear?All, Call for papers is open ?and the SAFNOG-5?Programme Committee?would like to encourage your participation and contributions?to?the upcoming?SAFNOG-5 Conference?in the form of Presentations?and Tutorials. ? We are looking for presenters who would: ??? - Offer a technical tutorial on an appropriate topic; ??? - Participate in the technical conference sessions as a speaker; ??? - Convene and chair panel sessions of relevant topics. *Conference Milestones* ? Call for Papers Opens?????????????????????21st May, 2019 Draft Program Published??????????????????29th July, 2019 Final Deadline for Submissions?????????5th August, 2019 ??? Final Program Published?????????????????16th August, 2019 ??? Final Slides Received??????????????????????20th August, 2019?? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???? **NOTE THAT REGARDLESS OF DEADLINES, SLOTS ARE FILLED ON A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED BASIS** ? *Program Material* The SAFNOG-5 Conference Programme consists of two parts, these being the Tutorials and Conference Tracks. Topics proposed must be relevant to Internet Operations and Technologies: ??? - IPv4 / IPv6 Routing and Operations ??? - IPv6 deployment and transition technologies ??? - Internet backbone operations ??? - ISP and Carrier services ??? - IXPs and Peering ??? - Research on Internet Operations and Deployment ??? - Software Defined Networking / Network Function Virtualisation ??? - Network security issues (NSP-SEC, DDoS, Anti-Spam, Anti-Malware) ??? - DNS / DNSSEC ??? - Internet policy (Security, Regulation, Content Management, Addressing, etc) ??? - Access and Transport Technologies, including Cable/DSL, LTE/5G, wireless, metro ethernet, fibre, segment routing ??? - Content & Service Delivery (Multicast, Voice, Video, "telepresence", Gaming) and Cloud Computing *CfP?Submissions* Draft slides for both tutorials and conference sessions MUST be provided with?CfP submissions otherwise the Programme Committee will be unable to review the submission. For avoidance of doubt this means that submissions which do not include slides will be rejected immediately. For work in progress, the most current information available at time of submission is acceptable. All draft and complete slides must be submitted in PDF format only. Final slides are to be provided by the specified deadline for publication on the SAFNOG-5?website. Prospective presenters should note that the majority of speaking slots will be filled well before the final submission deadline. The PC may, at their discretion, retain a limited number of slots up to the final submission deadline for presentations that are exceptionally timely, important, or of critical operational importance. Every year we turn away submissions, due to filling up all available programme slots before the deadline. Presenters should endeavour to get material into the PC sooner rather than later. Please submit your contributions?online at?http://www.safnog.org ?? Any questions or concerns should be addressed to the Programme Committee by e-mail at:? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? pc-chairs at safnog.org? We look forward to receiving your presentation proposals. ? ? Regards, ? SAFNOG-5 Programme Committee ? ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ safnog mailing list safnog at safnog.org http://lists.safnog.org/listinfo/safnog From mje at posix.co.za Tue Jun 4 15:41:50 2019 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 17:41:50 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [gtld-tech] REMINDER: 2nd Call for Participation -- ICANN DNSSEC Workshop at ICANN65, Marrakech, Morocco. In-Reply-To: <87f6599b161446488013a17e1484f838@cira.ca> References: <87f6599b161446488013a17e1484f838@cira.ca> Message-ID: <01e582a3-4e5f-6cab-9a50-8de46a083a63@posix.co.za> There are still DNS speaking opportunities at the up-coming ICANN event in Marrakech. Anyone interested? -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: [gtld-tech] REMINDER: 2nd Call for Participation -- ICANN DNSSEC Workshop at ICANN65, Marrakech, Morocco. Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 15:09:43 +0000 From: Jacques Latour To: gtld-tech at icann.org Hi all! We have 3 or 4 spots (90 minutes total) available in the DNSSEC program. ?Let us know if you have something to present, in person or remote. Jacques =========================== 2^nd Call for Participation -- ICANN DNSSEC Workshop at ICANN65, Marrakech, Morocco. The DNSSEC Deployment Initiative and the Internet Society Deploy360 Programme, in cooperation with the ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee (SSAC), are planning a DNSSEC Workshop during the ICANN65 meeting held from 24-27 June 2019 in Marrakech, Morocco.??The DNSSEC Workshop has been a part of ICANN meetings for several years and has provided a forum for both experienced and new people to meet, present and discuss current and future DNSSEC deployments.??For reference, the most recent session was held at the ICANN Community Forum in Kobe, Japan on 13 March 2019. The presentations and transcripts are available at: https://64.schedule.icann.org/meetings/961937 , https://64.schedule.icann.org/meetings/961938, and https://64.schedule.icann.org/meetings/961939. The DNSSEC Workshop Program Committee is developing a 3-hour program.??Proposals will be considered for the following topic areas and included if space permits.??In addition, we welcome suggestions for additional topics either for inclusion in the ICANN65 workshop, or for consideration for future workshops. 1.??DNSSEC Activities Panel (Regional and global) For this panel, we are seeking participation from those who have been involved in DNSSEC deployment in the region and also from those who have not deployed DNSSEC but who have a keen interest in the challenges and benefits of deployment, including Root Key Signing Key (KSK) Rollover activities.?? Now that DNSSEC has become an operational norm for many registries, registrars, and ISPs, what have we learned about how we manage DNSSEC? What is the best practice around key rollovers? How often do you review your disaster recovery procedures? Is there operational familiarity within your customer support teams? What operational statistics have we gathered about DNSSEC? Are there experiences being documented in the form of best practices, or something similar, for transfer of signed zones? If you have a specific concern about the Root Key Rollover, or believe you have a method or solution to help address impacts, we would like to hear from you. 2. DNSSEC Deployment Challenges The program committee is seeking input from those that are interested in implementation of DNSSEC but have general or particular concerns with DNSSEC.??In particular, we are seeking input from individuals that would be willing to participate in a panel that would discuss questions of the nature: - Are there any policies directly or indirectly impeding your DNSSEC deployment? (RRR model, CDS/CDNSKEY automation) - What are your most significant concerns with DNSSEC, e.g., complexity, training, implementation, operation or something else? - What do you expect DNSSEC to do for you and what doesn't it do? - What do you see as the most important trade-offs with respect to doing or not doing DNSSEC? We are interested in presentations related to any aspect of DNSSEC such as zone signing, DNS response validation, applications use of DNSSEC, registry/registrar DNSSEC activities, etc.??In addition, we welcome suggestions for additional topics. If you are interested in participating, please send a brief (1-2 sentence) description of your proposed presentation to dnssec-marrakech at isoc.org *by **Friday, 31 May 2019*** Thank you, Kathy and Julie On behalf of the DNSSEC Workshop Program Committee: Mark Elkins, DNS/ZACR Jean Robert Hountomey, AfricaCERT Jacques Latour, .CA Xiaodong Lee, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) Russ Mundy, Parsons Ondrej Filip, CZ.NIC Yoshiro Yoneya, JPRS Dan York, Internet Society -- 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 -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Dnssec-icann-workshops mailing list Dnssec-icann-workshops at elists.isoc.org https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/dnssec-icann-workshops -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. From comm-announce at afrinic.net Wed Jun 5 09:48:27 2019 From: comm-announce at afrinic.net (AFRINIC Communication) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:48:27 +0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat for NRO NC and PDWG elections Message-ID: <62F3E80B-E759-4ABA-9046-9C54CB2B5850@afrinic.net> [Version en fran?ais au bas] Dear colleagues, On behalf of the NomCom2019, AFRINIC is pleased to announce the following final candidate slate for the open seat on the Number Resource Organisation Number Council and Policy Development Working Group elections: Number Resource Organisation Number Council Election ? Mustapha Ben Jemaa ? Mike Silber Full candidate information has been published at https://afrinic.net/nro-nc-election-candidate-slate-2019 Policy Development Working Group Election ? Mark Elkins ? Caleb Ogundele ? Komi Elitcha ? Sami Hassan Full candidate information has been published at: https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-for-pdwg-election-2019 The community (and members) are hereby invited to view candidate details and express any comments about the suitability of the candidates for the above positions using the comment section at the URLs above. Election will be held during the AFRINIC-30 Public Policy Meeting to be held in Kampala on 19 June 2019. More information is available at: https://afrinic.net/election-process For any queries or clarification, please contact the nominations committee by email to nomcom2019[at]afrinic.net ?????????. Annonce des candidats pour les elections au Number Resource Organisation Number Council et Policy Development Working Group Au nom du Nomcom 2019, AFRINIC a le plaisir d?annoncer la liste finale des candidats pour election au sein du Number Resource Organisation Number Council. Election Number Resource Organisation Number Council ? Mustapha Ben Jemaa ? Mike Silber Plus d?informations sur les candidats sont publi?es ici: https://afrinic.net/nro-nc-election-candidate-slate-2019 Election Policy Development Working Group ? Mark Elkins ? Caleb Ogundele ? Komi Elitcha ? Sami Hassan Plus d?informations sur les candidats sont publi?es ici: https://afrinic.net/candidate-slate-for-pdwg-election-2019 La communaut? (et les membres) sont invit?s ? voir les d?tails des candidats et ? formuler des commentaires sur les qualit?s personnelles des candidats pour les postes ci-dessus en utilisant la section des commentaires sur les URL ci-dessus. L'?lection aura lieu lors de la r?union des politiques publiques d?AFRINIC-30 qui se tiendra ? Kampala le 19 juin 2019. Plus d'informations sont disponibles sur: https://afrinic.net/election-process Pour toute question ou clarification, veuillez contacter le comit? de nomination par courriel ? nomcom2019 [at] afrinic.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alanlevin at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 08:46:42 2019 From: alanlevin at gmail.com (Alan Levin) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 10:46:42 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Benjamin, When any board needs to formalise exactly how a CEO is to share a specific public document, that is micromanagement! I would go so far as to say it's so bad because: - when a CEO needs to formalise exactly how a Marketing Director is to share a specific public document, that is micromanagement! - when a Marketing Director needs to formalise exactly how a SEO consultant is to share a specific public document, that is micromanagement! Sincerely Alan On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 12:56, Benjamin Ledoh wrote: > Hi Sander, > > It seems to me that you have not got my points well. I will rephrase them > differently and give my last comments. > > Based on the minutes of the board, you sent an email accusing the board of > micromanagement. When I asked you to point it out in the minutes, you > directed me to textbook. I don't know whether the micromanagement you are > referring to the AFRINIC Community is in textbook. When you claim that > ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, I asked > you to prove it. Since you cannot prove it, you disappeared. Facing your > inability to substantiate your own claims, you are telling me that ?it is > more appropriate to stay silent?. > > I thank you for this option and I ask you to extend it to the entire > community since it will help us a lot in this community. In Yoruba land we > say that ?when you don?t have fact to argue, wisdom suggests you keep > quite.? Your silence would not give room to disruptive guys who want at > all cost the opportunity to create confusion and crises in this community > with the aims to destroy AFRINIC organization and community. > > Abide with your suggestion, it will be Great service to our community. > > Thank you, > > > Benjiloh > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:21 PM Sander Steffann wrote: > >> Hi Benjamin, >> >> > When I asked you to prove your hasty generalization ?all responsibility >> and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, you disappeared, and no >> answer never come. It stands now there is no way you can justify because >> the ?micromanagement? you are accusing the board to indulge in is not true. >> >> No, if you can't see any micromanagement in the minutes then there is >> nothing I can say to convince you, so I just gave up trying. Anything I say >> would not help this discussion any further, so it is more appropriate to >> stay silent. >> >> Cheers, >> Sander >> >> _______________________________________________ > 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 walu.john at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 06:34:12 2019 From: walu.john at gmail.com (John Walu) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 09:34:12 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Reform Nomcomm - was Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: I believe the deeper question is WHY is there an increasingly smaller candidate slate of those volunteering to serve on Afrinic board, year in year out. Two possible answers: A) Good candidates are avoiding the perceived 'challenging' board /management /community relationships that continue to persist. So nomcom hands are tied and cannot manufacture candidates. OR B) There are actually many good candidates applying BUT the Nomcom 'Black-box' processes is kicking them out and reducing them to 1 or 2 nominees. To drill down to the correct answer, I think the Nomcom process needs to be reformed. I still do not understand the benefit of having a black box process in the nomination committee where the community has no clue about how many candidates applied, how many got knocked out and why. IF national Presidential election systems are so open about this, why is that it has to remain hidden for Afrinic? And I say this as someone who has once served on Nomcomm as well as someone who has once been rejected by some previous Nomcomm (I want to believe it is within my right to share personal information/experience as this is not covered under NDA, but I stand to be corrected ;-) At a minimum, we should request that as Nomcom publishes the candidate slate, they should also show a tally (without the names) of how many candidates applied, how many got kicked out, why they were kicked out and how many successfully went thro. I believe this information can shed some light on the deeper question above of whether indeed we have fewer applicants or our black-box nommcom process is simply kicking them out in order to eventually present a single candidate. walu. On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Noah wrote: > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 15:15 Sander Steffann, wrote: > >> Hi Noah, >> >> > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 >> >> When there is no candidate then the current director will be re-appointed. > > > You missed the word "eligible" candidate! > > Nomcom has since slated eligible candidate and candidates with different > slates having one or more candidate and candidates nominated. > > Appointed != Elected. >> > > There are upcoming elections scheduled where we members will be casting > votes for various candidates. > > > >> >> No election -> no Directors >> > >> > Board can appoint. >> >> True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. >> >> An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members though, and >> for a bottom-up community ending up with more appointed than elected board >> members would not be good. > > > We have elections coming up soon and we intend to elect otherwise the > board would have to appoint or reappoint as its within its powers. > > > >> Cheers, >> Sander >> > > 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 owen at delong.com Tue Jun 4 23:29:06 2019 From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:29:06 -0700 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: Noah, The key issue that you are either missing or choosing to ignore is that there is a seat where nomcom slated only one candidate. The combination of board action to remove none of the above from slate and this singable candidate slate by nomcom creates a situation where members can either support the candidate chosen by the nomcom or abstain. There is no ability for members to say ?no, this person should not get a board seat.? This candidate would technically be treated as elected (although as Sander pointed out, calling it an election is questionable at best) and instead of the short term would effectively have a full 3 year term circumventing the intent of the electoral process. This sets a horrible precedent that would effectively allow a simple majority of the board to self-appoint directors to three year terms through this abuse of the electoral process. This is a structural error in the bylaws that should be addressed. The simplest fix would be to require board and nomcom to slate at least n+1 candidates for each race. (E.g. a minimum of 6 candidates for a vote for 5 race, 2 candidates for a vote for one race, etc. ) Restoration of none of the above is another alternative. There are many other solutions as well. The point is that this is a problem that the community and the board should look to fix. Owen > On Jun 4, 2019, at 05:46, Noah wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 15:15 Sander Steffann, wrote: >> Hi Noah, >> >> > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 >> >> When there is no candidate then the current director will be re-appointed. > > > > You missed the word "eligible" candidate! > > Nomcom has since slated eligible candidate and candidates with different slates having one or more candidate and candidates nominated. > >> Appointed != Elected. > > > There are upcoming elections scheduled where we members will be casting votes for various candidates. > > >> >> >> No election -> no Directors >> > >> > Board can appoint. >> >> True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. >> >> An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members though, and for a bottom-up community ending up with more appointed than elected board members would not be good. > > > We have elections coming up soon and we intend to elect otherwise the board would have to appoint or reappoint as its within its powers. > > >> >> Cheers, >> Sander > > > Noah >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mctimconsulting at gmail.com Tue Jun 4 23:22:51 2019 From: mctimconsulting at gmail.com (Mc Tim) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 19:22:51 -0400 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Benjamin, Complaining that a CEO publicized an already public document is, prima facie "micromanangement". As SS said, if you can't see that, then we can't help. Best Regards, McTim On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 6:56 AM Benjamin Ledoh wrote: > Hi Sander, > > It seems to me that you have not got my points well. I will rephrase them > differently and give my last comments. > > Based on the minutes of the board, you sent an email accusing the board of > micromanagement. When I asked you to point it out in the minutes, you > directed me to textbook. I don't know whether the micromanagement you are > referring to the AFRINIC Community is in textbook. When you claim that > ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, I asked > you to prove it. Since you cannot prove it, you disappeared. Facing your > inability to substantiate your own claims, you are telling me that ?it is > more appropriate to stay silent?. > > I thank you for this option and I ask you to extend it to the entire > community since it will help us a lot in this community. In Yoruba land we > say that ?when you don?t have fact to argue, wisdom suggests you keep > quite.? Your silence would not give room to disruptive guys who want at > all cost the opportunity to create confusion and crises in this community > with the aims to destroy AFRINIC organization and community. > > Abide with your suggestion, it will be Great service to our community. > > Thank you, > > > Benjiloh > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:21 PM Sander Steffann wrote: > >> Hi Benjamin, >> >> > When I asked you to prove your hasty generalization ?all responsibility >> and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, you disappeared, and no >> answer never come. It stands now there is no way you can justify because >> the ?micromanagement? you are accusing the board to indulge in is not true. >> >> No, if you can't see any micromanagement in the minutes then there is >> nothing I can say to convince you, so I just gave up trying. Anything I say >> would not help this discussion any further, so it is more appropriate to >> stay silent. >> >> Cheers, >> Sander >> >> _______________________________________________ > 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 geier at geier.ne.tz Wed Jun 5 14:29:27 2019 From: geier at geier.ne.tz (Frank Habicht) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 17:29:27 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Reform Nomcomm - was Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: Hi Walu and all, The NomCom report shared with the invitation includes _some_ info. - It received 11 nominations. - one was withdrawn - 8 are remaining that means to me that 2 were "filtered". I requested them to disclose how many nominations *for each seat* were received. When this gets answered we will see for which seats there was filtering. I agree we shouldn't have this black box. I agree NomCom should explain why nominees were "kicked out". I believe the members voting should be provided with the information that is now used to reject nominees and then be allowed to make their own choice. Regards, Frank On 05/06/2019 09:34, John Walu wrote: > I believe the deeper question is WHY is there an increasingly smaller > candidate slate of those volunteering to serve on Afrinic board, year in > year out. > > Two possible answers: > A) Good candidates are avoiding the perceived 'challenging' board > /management /community relationships that continue to persist. So nomcom > hands are tied and cannot manufacture candidates. > > OR > B) There are actually many good candidates applying? BUT the Nomcom > 'Black-box' processes is kicking them out and reducing them to 1 or 2 > nominees. > > To drill down to the correct answer, I think the Nomcom process needs to > be reformed.? > > I still do not understand the benefit of having a black box process in > the nomination committee where the community has no clue about how many > candidates applied, how many got knocked out and why. IF national > Presidential election systems are so open about this, why is that it has > to remain hidden for Afrinic? > > And I say this as someone who has once served on Nomcomm as well as > someone who has once been rejected by some previous Nomcomm (I want to > believe it is within my right to share personal information/experience > as this is not covered under NDA, but I stand to be corrected ;-) > > At a minimum, we should request that as Nomcom publishes the candidate > slate, they should also show a tally (without the names) of how many > candidates applied, how many got kicked out, why they were kicked out > and how many successfully went thro.? > > I believe this information can shed some light on the deeper question > above of whether indeed we have fewer applicants or our black-box > nommcom process is simply kicking them out in order to eventually > present a single candidate. > > walu. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Noah > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 15:15 Sander Steffann, > wrote: > > Hi Noah, > > > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 > > When there is no candidate then the current director will be > re-appointed. > > > You missed the word "eligible" candidate!? > > Nomcom has since slated eligible candidate and candidates with > different slates having one or more candidate and candidates nominated. > > Appointed != Elected. > > > There are upcoming elections scheduled where we members will be > casting votes for various candidates. > > > > >> No election -> no Directors > > > > Board can appoint. > > True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. > > An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members > though, and for a bottom-up community ending up with more > appointed than elected board members would not be good. > > > We have elections coming up soon and we intend to elect otherwise > the board would have to appoint or reappoint as its within its powers. > > > > Cheers, > Sander > > > 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 > From walu.john at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 15:23:05 2019 From: walu.john at gmail.com (John Walu) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 18:23:05 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Reform Nomcomm - was Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: Frank Habicht wrote: >>>The NomCom report shared with the invitation includes _some_ info. ..cant parse. Where is this report? What does it mean shared 'with the invitation'? Either way 11 applicants for 5 continent-wide seats may mean we are not making Afrinic board seats attractive. It would be nice to compare experiences in terms of applicant numbers in other RIRs or ICANN in general. If the numbers are the same, then we conclude it is the nature of the business ;-) walu On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 5:55 PM Frank Habicht wrote: > Hi Walu and all, > > The NomCom report shared with the invitation includes _some_ info. > - It received 11 nominations. > - one was withdrawn > - 8 are remaining > > that means to me that 2 were "filtered". > > I requested them to disclose how many nominations *for each seat* were > received. > When this gets answered we will see for which seats there was filtering. > > I agree we shouldn't have this black box. > I agree NomCom should explain why nominees were "kicked out". > I believe the members voting should be provided with the information > that is now used to reject nominees and then be allowed to make their > own choice. > > Regards, > Frank > > > On 05/06/2019 09:34, John Walu wrote: > > I believe the deeper question is WHY is there an increasingly smaller > > candidate slate of those volunteering to serve on Afrinic board, year in > > year out. > > > > Two possible answers: > > A) Good candidates are avoiding the perceived 'challenging' board > > /management /community relationships that continue to persist. So nomcom > > hands are tied and cannot manufacture candidates. > > > > OR > > B) There are actually many good candidates applying BUT the Nomcom > > 'Black-box' processes is kicking them out and reducing them to 1 or 2 > > nominees. > > > > To drill down to the correct answer, I think the Nomcom process needs to > > be reformed. > > > > I still do not understand the benefit of having a black box process in > > the nomination committee where the community has no clue about how many > > candidates applied, how many got knocked out and why. IF national > > Presidential election systems are so open about this, why is that it has > > to remain hidden for Afrinic? > > > > And I say this as someone who has once served on Nomcomm as well as > > someone who has once been rejected by some previous Nomcomm (I want to > > believe it is within my right to share personal information/experience > > as this is not covered under NDA, but I stand to be corrected ;-) > > > > At a minimum, we should request that as Nomcom publishes the candidate > > slate, they should also show a tally (without the names) of how many > > candidates applied, how many got kicked out, why they were kicked out > > and how many successfully went thro. > > > > I believe this information can shed some light on the deeper question > > above of whether indeed we have fewer applicants or our black-box > > nommcom process is simply kicking them out in order to eventually > > present a single candidate. > > > > walu. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Noah > > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 15:15 Sander Steffann, > > wrote: > > > > Hi Noah, > > > > > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 > > > > When there is no candidate then the current director will be > > re-appointed. > > > > > > You missed the word "eligible" candidate! > > > > Nomcom has since slated eligible candidate and candidates with > > different slates having one or more candidate and candidates > nominated. > > > > Appointed != Elected. > > > > > > There are upcoming elections scheduled where we members will be > > casting votes for various candidates. > > > > > > > > >> No election -> no Directors > > > > > > Board can appoint. > > > > True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. > > > > An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members > > though, and for a bottom-up community ending up with more > > appointed than elected board members would not be good. > > > > > > We have elections coming up soon and we intend to elect otherwise > > the board would have to appoint or reappoint as its within its > powers. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Sander > > > > > > 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 silber.mike at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 15:37:40 2019 From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 17:37:40 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Reform Nomcomm - was Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: <5C8F3ABD-84A7-4656-87D4-51629C591383@gmail.com> Walu > On 5 Jun 2019, at 17:23, John Walu wrote: > > Frank Habicht > wrote: > >>>The NomCom report shared with the invitation includes _some_ info. > > ..cant parse. Where is this report? What does it mean shared 'with the invitation'? > > Either way 11 applicants for 5 continent-wide seats may mean we are not making Afrinic board seats attractive. It would be nice to compare experiences in terms of applicant numbers in other RIRs or ICANN in general. If the numbers are the same, then we conclude it is the nature of the business ;-) I can speak of the ICANN experience: 16 voting directors 4 non-voting liaisons of these voting members 2 appointed by the ASO, 2 by the ccNSO and 2 by the GNSO. 1 by the At-Large and the CEO 8 by the NomCom The SO and AL Community appointees have varying degrees of competition. The last ASO appointment / election had 3 candidates (if I recall correctly), the ccNSO had 2. However there have been some unopposed appointments too. Similarly with the liaisons, there is a mix of elections and unopposed appointments. Some of the SO?s include the ability to block a candidate and then a compromise candidate must be sought. The NomCom appoints candidates - it does not create a slate for election. It also appoints candidates to the council?s of some of the SO?s to allow for greater diversity and a reduction in group think. In 2018 there were 109 applications for 8 positions (3 board, 2 ALAC, 2 ccNSO and 1 GNSO). From my previous experience in the ICANN NomCom, the majority apply for the board only, a small minority apply for specific SO and ALAC appointments and a bigger minority apply for the board but indicate they will consider another position. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mje at posix.co.za Wed Jun 5 16:23:22 2019 From: mje at posix.co.za (Mark Elkins) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 18:23:22 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Reform Nomcomm - was Announcement for Final Candidate Slate for Open Seat on AFRINIC Governance Committee In-Reply-To: References: <8F54E80D-7FAA-4850-A97F-72C520E4990A@afrinic.net> <65CD9A0D-99B5-4C9C-90EC-80090FFC90D0@delong.com> <69091646-9763-4493-8DCD-658B8C39A843@steffann.nl>

Message-ID: I've been involved with NomCom for a goodly number of years. The "Black Box" approach worked for me when I was involved. I think in all that time, only two nominations were dismissed. One because the person had no desire to stand - they were nominated kinda out of the blue. The other was similar - and I believe was part of either a prank or good intentions in a wrong way. It might also be a mis-understanding of what Guidelines are. A Guideline is simply that - a line that guides. You can choose to ignore it and sometimes that can be the wiser choice. Others may deem a guideline as something that must be followed. I'd call that a Rule, not a Guideline. I'm? standing for the position of Policy development Co-Chair and was asked a number of things that I would deem appropriate for a Board Seat but not particularly necessary at all for PDWG Co-Chair - hence my observation. One member of the NomCom is also a Board Member and should be reporting back to the Board any key decisions that NomCom make (well - I used to do that). On 2019/06/05 16:29, Frank Habicht wrote: > Hi Walu and all, > > The NomCom report shared with the invitation includes _some_ info. > - It received 11 nominations. > - one was withdrawn > - 8 are remaining > > that means to me that 2 were "filtered". > > I requested them to disclose how many nominations *for each seat* were > received. > When this gets answered we will see for which seats there was filtering. > > I agree we shouldn't have this black box. > I agree NomCom should explain why nominees were "kicked out". > I believe the members voting should be provided with the information > that is now used to reject nominees and then be allowed to make their > own choice. > > Regards, > Frank > > > On 05/06/2019 09:34, John Walu wrote: >> I believe the deeper question is WHY is there an increasingly smaller >> candidate slate of those volunteering to serve on Afrinic board, year in >> year out. >> >> Two possible answers: >> A) Good candidates are avoiding the perceived 'challenging' board >> /management /community relationships that continue to persist. So nomcom >> hands are tied and cannot manufacture candidates. >> >> OR >> B) There are actually many good candidates applying? BUT the Nomcom >> 'Black-box' processes is kicking them out and reducing them to 1 or 2 >> nominees. >> >> To drill down to the correct answer, I think the Nomcom process needs to >> be reformed. >> >> I still do not understand the benefit of having a black box process in >> the nomination committee where the community has no clue about how many >> candidates applied, how many got knocked out and why. IF national >> Presidential election systems are so open about this, why is that it has >> to remain hidden for Afrinic? >> >> And I say this as someone who has once served on Nomcomm as well as >> someone who has once been rejected by some previous Nomcomm (I want to >> believe it is within my right to share personal information/experience >> as this is not covered under NDA, but I stand to be corrected ;-) >> >> At a minimum, we should request that as Nomcom publishes the candidate >> slate, they should also show a tally (without the names) of how many >> candidates applied, how many got kicked out, why they were kicked out >> and how many successfully went thro. >> >> I believe this information can shed some light on the deeper question >> above of whether indeed we have fewer applicants or our black-box >> nommcom process is simply kicking them out in order to eventually >> present a single candidate. >> >> walu. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 3:47 PM Noah > > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Tue, 4 Jun 2019, 15:15 Sander Steffann, > > wrote: >> >> Hi Noah, >> >> > Read the bylaws especially section 13.8 >> >> When there is no candidate then the current director will be >> re-appointed. >> >> >> You missed the word "eligible" candidate! >> >> Nomcom has since slated eligible candidate and candidates with >> different slates having one or more candidate and candidates nominated. >> >> Appointed != Elected. >> >> >> There are upcoming elections scheduled where we members will be >> casting votes for various candidates. >> >> >> >> >> No election -> no Directors >> > >> > Board can appoint. >> >> True. My statement was exaggerated. My apologies. >> >> An appointed board does not have a mandate from the members >> though, and for a bottom-up community ending up with more >> appointed than elected board members would not be good. >> >> >> We have elections coming up soon and we intend to elect otherwise >> the board would have to appoint or reappoint as its within its powers. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Sander >> >> >> 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 -- 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 iyedigoma at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 18:21:31 2019 From: iyedigoma at gmail.com (Iyedi Goma) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 19:21:31 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Information about the nominations for the Board elections Message-ID: Dear community, Veuillez trouvez la version fran?aise ci dessous. On behalf of the nomination committee, I would like to provide some information about the nominations for the Board Elections. The nomination committee processed 11 nominations as follows: Northern Africa 3 Western Africa 2 Southern Africa 1 Eastern Africa 2 Non-Regional 3 The nomination committee requested Afrinic to verify whether the information which was submitted complies with the Bylaws Article 12.14(i). Afrinic confirmed that some of nominators and seconder were not in ?good standing?. The nomination committee contacted the nominees to inform them about the matter and advised to provide nominators and seconders who are in ?good standing?. The nomination committee proceeded with the checking of criteria in accordance with the Bylaws Article 13.10. The nomination committee extended the call for nominations. to attract more nominations. The nomination committee held a webinar to explain the nomination process and to get feedback from the community. After reviewing the nominations, the nomination committee found that there were two nominations which did not comply with the Bylaws Article 12.14(i). In addition, one of the nominees notified the nomination committee about a withdrawal. We hope that the above clarifies the process which was followed. Cher membre de la communaut? Au nom du comit? de nomination nous souhaitons apporter quelques informations suppl?mentaire sur le processus suivi par le comit? de nomination, pour les candidatures des ?lections des Directeurs d?Afrinic Nous avons re?u au total 11 postulants suivant la r?partition qui suit: Afrique du Nord 3 Afrique du Ouest 2 Afrique du Sud 1 Afrique de l?Est 2 R?gion Ind?pendant 3 Le comit? de nomination a demand? ? AFRINIC de proc?der ? la v?rification des informations fournies selon le r?glement int?rieur dans son article 12.14 (i). Nous avons re?u la confirmation d Afrinic que le statut de certain membres qui avaient propos?s et second?s certain candidats n'?taient pas en r?gle. Le comit? de nomination a contact? les postulants concern?s pour les tenir inform?s et a donn? les orientations sur la question. Le comit? de nomination ? proc?der au contr?le et ? la v?rification des crit?res selon le r?glement int?rieur dans son article 13.10. Le comit? de nomination avait demand? une rallonge des dates des fin de candidature afin d'avoir plus de postulants et donner la marge aux postulants pour compl?ter leurs dossiers. En sus de cela le comit? de nomination ? organiser une r?union de sensibilisation, en ligne, sur les questions de candidature aux ?lections d AFRINIC et surtout pour recueillir les difficult?s auxquelles la communaut? est confront?e. Apr?s la phase de revue des dossiers de candidatures nous avons constat? qu?il y avait deux dossiers non conforme au r?glement int?rieur selon l?article 12.14 (i). En plus, un postulant nous avait notifi? sur le retrait de sa candidature et ce qui fut fait. Nous osons esp?rer que cette communication apporterait des ?l?ments de r?ponse sur le processus qui ? ?t? suivi. Serge-parfait Goma Afrinic 2019 nomcom Chair -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From walu.john at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 18:35:27 2019 From: walu.john at gmail.com (John Walu) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 21:35:27 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Information about the nominations for the Board elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thnx for the info. Quite insightful. rgds. walu. On Wed, 5 Jun 2019, 21:22 Iyedi Goma, wrote: > > > Dear community, > > Veuillez trouvez la version fran?aise ci dessous. > > On behalf of the nomination committee, I would like to provide some > information about the nominations for the Board Elections. > > The nomination committee processed 11 nominations as follows: > > Northern Africa 3 > > Western Africa 2 > > Southern Africa 1 > > Eastern Africa 2 > > Non-Regional 3 > > > The nomination committee requested Afrinic to verify whether the > information which was submitted complies with the Bylaws Article 12.14(i). > Afrinic confirmed that some of nominators and seconder were not in ?good > standing?. The nomination committee contacted the nominees to inform them > about the matter and advised to provide nominators and seconders who are in > ?good standing?. > > The nomination committee proceeded with the checking of criteria in > accordance with the Bylaws Article 13.10. > > The nomination committee extended the call for nominations. to attract > more nominations. > > The nomination committee held a webinar to explain the nomination process > and to get feedback from the community. > > After reviewing the nominations, the nomination committee found that there > were two nominations which did not comply with the Bylaws Article 12.14(i). > In addition, one of the nominees notified the nomination committee about a > withdrawal. > > We hope that the above clarifies the process which was followed. > > > > > > > Cher membre de la communaut? > > Au nom du comit? de nomination nous souhaitons apporter quelques > informations suppl?mentaire sur le processus suivi par le comit? de > nomination, pour les candidatures des ?lections des Directeurs d?Afrinic > > Nous avons re?u au total 11 postulants suivant la r?partition qui suit: > > Afrique du Nord 3 > > Afrique du Ouest 2 > > Afrique du Sud 1 > > Afrique de l?Est 2 > > R?gion Ind?pendant 3 > > Le comit? de nomination a demand? ? AFRINIC de proc?der ? la v?rification > des informations fournies selon le r?glement int?rieur dans son article > 12.14 (i). Nous avons re?u la confirmation d Afrinic que le statut de > certain membres qui avaient propos?s et second?s certain candidats > n'?taient pas en r?gle. Le comit? de nomination a contact? les postulants > concern?s pour les tenir inform?s et a donn? les orientations sur la > question. > > Le comit? de nomination ? proc?der au contr?le et ? la v?rification des > crit?res selon le r?glement int?rieur dans son article 13.10. > > Le comit? de nomination avait demand? une rallonge des dates des fin de > candidature afin d'avoir plus de postulants et donner la marge aux > postulants pour compl?ter leurs dossiers. En sus de cela le comit? de > nomination ? organiser une r?union de sensibilisation, en ligne, sur les > questions de candidature aux ?lections d AFRINIC et surtout pour recueillir > les difficult?s auxquelles la communaut? est confront?e. > > Apr?s la phase de revue des dossiers de candidatures nous avons constat? > qu?il y avait deux dossiers non conforme au r?glement int?rieur selon > l?article 12.14 (i). En plus, un postulant nous avait notifi? sur le > retrait de sa candidature et ce qui fut fait. > > Nous osons esp?rer que cette communication apporterait des ?l?ments de > r?ponse sur le processus qui ? ?t? suivi. > > > > Serge-parfait Goma > > Afrinic 2019 nomcom Chair > _______________________________________________ > 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 Jun 5 18:38:37 2019 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 21:38:37 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Information about the nominations for the Board elections In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Nomcom Chair Thank you so much Goma for the information and clarification. Very insightful indeed. Noah On Wed, 5 Jun 2019, 21:23 Iyedi Goma, wrote: > > > Dear community, > > Veuillez trouvez la version fran?aise ci dessous. > > On behalf of the nomination committee, I would like to provide some > information about the nominations for the Board Elections. > > The nomination committee processed 11 nominations as follows: > > Northern Africa 3 > > Western Africa 2 > > Southern Africa 1 > > Eastern Africa 2 > > Non-Regional 3 > > > The nomination committee requested Afrinic to verify whether the > information which was submitted complies with the Bylaws Article 12.14(i). > Afrinic confirmed that some of nominators and seconder were not in ?good > standing?. The nomination committee contacted the nominees to inform them > about the matter and advised to provide nominators and seconders who are in > ?good standing?. > > The nomination committee proceeded with the checking of criteria in > accordance with the Bylaws Article 13.10. > > The nomination committee extended the call for nominations. to attract > more nominations. > > The nomination committee held a webinar to explain the nomination process > and to get feedback from the community. > > After reviewing the nominations, the nomination committee found that there > were two nominations which did not comply with the Bylaws Article 12.14(i). > In addition, one of the nominees notified the nomination committee about a > withdrawal. > > We hope that the above clarifies the process which was followed. > > > > > > > Cher membre de la communaut? > > Au nom du comit? de nomination nous souhaitons apporter quelques > informations suppl?mentaire sur le processus suivi par le comit? de > nomination, pour les candidatures des ?lections des Directeurs d?Afrinic > > Nous avons re?u au total 11 postulants suivant la r?partition qui suit: > > Afrique du Nord 3 > > Afrique du Ouest 2 > > Afrique du Sud 1 > > Afrique de l?Est 2 > > R?gion Ind?pendant 3 > > Le comit? de nomination a demand? ? AFRINIC de proc?der ? la v?rification > des informations fournies selon le r?glement int?rieur dans son article > 12.14 (i). Nous avons re?u la confirmation d Afrinic que le statut de > certain membres qui avaient propos?s et second?s certain candidats > n'?taient pas en r?gle. Le comit? de nomination a contact? les postulants > concern?s pour les tenir inform?s et a donn? les orientations sur la > question. > > Le comit? de nomination ? proc?der au contr?le et ? la v?rification des > crit?res selon le r?glement int?rieur dans son article 13.10. > > Le comit? de nomination avait demand? une rallonge des dates des fin de > candidature afin d'avoir plus de postulants et donner la marge aux > postulants pour compl?ter leurs dossiers. En sus de cela le comit? de > nomination ? organiser une r?union de sensibilisation, en ligne, sur les > questions de candidature aux ?lections d AFRINIC et surtout pour recueillir > les difficult?s auxquelles la communaut? est confront?e. > > Apr?s la phase de revue des dossiers de candidatures nous avons constat? > qu?il y avait deux dossiers non conforme au r?glement int?rieur selon > l?article 12.14 (i). En plus, un postulant nous avait notifi? sur le > retrait de sa candidature et ce qui fut fait. > > Nous osons esp?rer que cette communication apporterait des ?l?ments de > r?ponse sur le processus qui ? ?t? suivi. > > > > Serge-parfait Goma > > Afrinic 2019 nomcom Chair > _______________________________________________ > 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 sander at steffann.nl Wed Jun 5 19:44:11 2019 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 21:44:11 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> Message-ID: <852AD8AB-51F4-48AC-8868-1CC2362F327D@steffann.nl> Hi, Call to the chairs: can you please stop people on this list from making ad hominem attacks against me? I've been called Satan before, now I'm called evil. Despite the entertainment value this is getting a bit annoying... Cheers, Sander From sander at steffann.nl Wed Jun 5 20:39:03 2019 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 22:39:03 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> <852AD8AB-51F4-48AC-8868-1CC2362F327D@steffann.nl> Message-ID: > Please take your time to read and don't let your emotion (as usual) takes over your common sense. No worries Benjamin, at the moment my only emotion is laughter :) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 19:58:35 2019 From: benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com (Benjamin Ledoh) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 19:58:35 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: <852AD8AB-51F4-48AC-8868-1CC2362F327D@steffann.nl> References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> <852AD8AB-51F4-48AC-8868-1CC2362F327D@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Hi Sander, I have not said that you are evil. I said "This divisive tactic is evil ". . When I said "when you are defending evil, you will end up being evil". I mean defending what is wrong.* So no "hominem attacks".* Please take your time to read and don't let your emotion (as usual) takes over your common sense. I am sorry if I sound harsh. Benjiloh On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:44 PM Sander Steffann wrote: > Hi, > > Call to the chairs: can you please stop people on this list from making ad > hominem attacks against me? I've been called Satan before, now I'm called > evil. > > Despite the entertainment value this is getting a bit annoying... > > Cheers, > Sander > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com Wed Jun 5 19:22:08 2019 From: benjamin.ledoh at gmail.com (Benjamin Ledoh) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 19:22:08 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Hi Alan and Mc Tim, Sander, consciously or unconsciously, made fallacious statements in his endeavor to praise the outgoing CEO and his supporter, and disgrace those who want to stick to principles and procedures. This divisive tactic is evil and especially when it is coming from someone like Sander, a former Co-Chair in RIPE community who had displayed high sense of rationality in his community. You (Alan and Mc Tim) know, it is allowed to show that there is a division in AFRINIC Community *if and only if* it truly exists and also based on facts not on lies. You (Alan and Mc Tim) know that there is no trace of micromanagement in the minutes. Your tutorial and explanations on ?micromanagement? are not needed because I would not argue with Sander. Sander mention transparency in his email and I agree that we have to praise for transparency. I invite you to join me to praise the Board for publishing the minutes gave room to Sander to err. For both of you (Alan and Mc Tim), keep in mind that when you are defending evil, you will end up being evil. Cheers Benjiloh On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 8:46 AM Alan Levin wrote: > Benjamin, > > When any board needs to formalise exactly how a CEO is to share a specific > public document, that is micromanagement! > > I would go so far as to say it's so bad because: > - when a CEO needs to formalise exactly how a Marketing Director is to > share a specific public document, that is micromanagement! > - when a Marketing Director needs to formalise exactly how a SEO > consultant is to share a specific public document, that is micromanagement! > > Sincerely > > Alan > > > On Tue, 4 Jun 2019 at 12:56, Benjamin Ledoh > wrote: > >> Hi Sander, >> >> It seems to me that you have not got my points well. I will rephrase them >> differently and give my last comments. >> >> Based on the minutes of the board, you sent an email accusing the board >> of micromanagement. When I asked you to point it out in the minutes, you >> directed me to textbook. I don't know whether the micromanagement you are >> referring to the AFRINIC Community is in textbook. When you claim that >> ?all responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, I asked >> you to prove it. Since you cannot prove it, you disappeared. Facing your >> inability to substantiate your own claims, you are telling me that ?it is >> more appropriate to stay silent?. >> >> I thank you for this option and I ask you to extend it to the entire >> community since it will help us a lot in this community. In Yoruba land we >> say that ?when you don?t have fact to argue, wisdom suggests you keep >> quite.? Your silence would not give room to disruptive guys who want at >> all cost the opportunity to create confusion and crises in this community >> with the aims to destroy AFRINIC organization and community. >> >> Abide with your suggestion, it will be Great service to our community. >> >> Thank you, >> >> >> Benjiloh >> >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:21 PM Sander Steffann >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Benjamin, >>> >>> > When I asked you to prove your hasty generalization ?all >>> responsibility and autonomy of the CEO has been taken away?, you >>> disappeared, and no answer never come. It stands now there is no way you >>> can justify because the ?micromanagement? you are accusing the board to >>> indulge in is not true. >>> >>> No, if you can't see any micromanagement in the minutes then there is >>> nothing I can say to convince you, so I just gave up trying. Anything I say >>> would not help this discussion any further, so it is more appropriate to >>> stay silent. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Sander >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> 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 Jun 6 05:29:58 2019 From: badru.ntege at nftconsult.com (Badru Ntege) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 05:29:58 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Gratitude In-Reply-To: References: <81DCB34E-B16C-4DF8-9AF4-52172B236DC2@steffann.nl> <98D7654A-B24D-49A2-995D-40C15215270F@steffann.nl> <852AD8AB-51F4-48AC-8868-1CC2362F327D@steffann.nl> Message-ID: Members we have beaten this issue to death and then beaten the dead issue back to life. We live in a very diverse community and I always say our diversity is our strengths. Some of you might see an issue as unacceptable and some of you might see the issue as acceptable or even justifiable. Reason a jury in a court of law might return a verdict that to many might be unacceptable. We are a community of adults able to make judgement based on our paradigm. To those who feel aggrieved I?m not sure castigating an entire board for a single or 5 resolutions out 20 made will get us anywhere. You will not make the change you want by email. Stand up and be counted volunteer yourselves next elections and get on the board and make the contribution. Lets move away from divisive dialogue. For the last 15 years AfriNIC has continued to make impact in our region while the detractors have worked tirelessly to find all manor of avenues to slow the pace. But you cannot stop a community with a mission, nor can a community with mission expect to achieve the mission without challenges. Let?s get into additive dialogue. Theirs is space for everyone to co-exist. There a number of members trying so much to sow the concept of a divided community. AfriNIC region serves over 1 billion people. Show me just 100 million of that billion against the mission then I will start feeling the division. Our energies are best used positively. BN [signature_2142098168] [signature_2065552379] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 165410 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 48894 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: From oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng Thu Jun 6 06:47:53 2019 From: oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng (ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 07:47:53 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Complain to NoMCOM Message-ID: Dear all I one of the those who have spent a considerable amount of time in preparing my application for the position of the AFRINIC policy chair, unfortunately, I didn?t get listed. Am sending this email just to clarify and correct the situation as I believe NOMCOM is out to a good job I checked my email today after being on holiday for Ramadan. Ramadan is a period where Muslims fast and it can be stressful but it is a period I take some time out of my stressful schedule to have a relationship with my creator. On checking my email I realised my name was not on the announcement list as a candidate (Slate) and I was shocked as I didn?t know why this has happened. on one hand, I felt maybe NOMCOM felt I was not good enough and I went on with my life. Later in the day, I checked my junk email and found that an email was sent earlier confirming the submission of my application asking for some personal documents. The email address used was a Gmail account. This email was sent last Sunday asking for the documents with a deadline for Monday. So I was wondering if the mail has even come into the normal box NOMCOM expected that candidates should provide personal information and documents within ONE day. They forgot it?s a weekend and people might also be on holiday. There was nothin asking me not to proceed on holiday after submitting the application. All required documents should have been asked during the application process. Again there was no reminder email. I believe NOMCOM should have used an official account not a random Gmail account to prevent filters seeing them as junk. I have now provided all the documents that were requested and I believe the application should be reconsidered I have respect for NONCOM and its members but I just feel I needed to send this so that NOMCOM can correct its mistakes as no one is perfect. I think its also unfair if this is not corrected. Candidates should be allowed to make their own decision to run or not as long as they are eligible. Furthermore, for the future, I would like to suggest the following 1. All information required to verify a candidates eligibility should be published well in advance of the nominating period. 2. Candidates should be required to submit all of that information within 30 days after being nominated, prior to the nominating committee?s consideration of their candidacy. 3. Requests for additional information from the nominating committee should occur only in exceptional circumstances. In such a case, the request shall give each candidate at least 10 days to respond. 4. All communications between the nominating committee and candidates should use an official address reserved for the nominating committee. Thank you -- * Abdulkarim A.Oloyede*. -- Website ,?Weekly Bulletin ?UGPortal PGPortal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wayne at domains.co.za Thu Jun 6 07:00:34 2019 From: wayne at domains.co.za (Wayne Diamond) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 07:00:34 +0000 Subject: [Community-Discuss] Complain to NoMCOM In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Based on numerous points the below, I would say that the entire AfriNic nomination process is flawed and this slate / nomination process should be restarted from scratch. Wayne From: ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE Sent: 06 June 2019 08:48 AM To: rpd List ; community-discuss at afrinic.net Subject: [Community-Discuss] Complain to NoMCOM Dear all I one of the those who have spent a considerable amount of time in preparing my application for the position of the AFRINIC policy chair, unfortunately, I didn?t get listed. Am sending this email just to clarify and correct the situation as I believe NOMCOM is out to a good job I checked my email today after being on holiday for Ramadan. Ramadan is a period where Muslims fast and it can be stressful but it is a period I take some time out of my stressful schedule to have a relationship with my creator. On checking my email I realised my name was not on the announcement list as a candidate (Slate) and I was shocked as I didn?t know why this has happened. on one hand, I felt maybe NOMCOM felt I was not good enough and I went on with my life. Later in the day, I checked my junk email and found that an email was sent earlier confirming the submission of my application asking for some personal documents. The email address used was a Gmail account. This email was sent last Sunday asking for the documents with a deadline for Monday. So I was wondering if the mail has even come into the normal box NOMCOM expected that candidates should provide personal information and documents within ONE day. They forgot it?s a weekend and people might also be on holiday. There was nothin asking me not to proceed on holiday after submitting the application. All required documents should have been asked during the application process. Again there was no reminder email. I believe NOMCOM should have used an official account not a random Gmail account to prevent filters seeing them as junk. I have now provided all the documents that were requested and I believe the application should be reconsidered I have respect for NONCOM and its members but I just feel I needed to send this so that NOMCOM can correct its mistakes as no one is perfect. I think its also unfair if this is not corrected. Candidates should be allowed to make their own decision to run or not as long as they are eligible. Furthermore, for the future, I would like to suggest the following 1. All information required to verify a candidates eligibility should be published well in advance of the nominating period. 2. Candidates should be required to submit all of that information within 30 days after being nominated, prior to the nominating committee?s consideration of their candidacy. 3. Requests for additional information from the nominating committee should occur only in exceptional circumstances. In such a case, the request shall give each candidate at least 10 days to respond. 4. All communications between the nominating committee and candidates should use an official address reserved for the nominating committee. Thank you -- Abdulkarim A.Oloyede. Website, Weekly Bulletin UGPortal PGPortal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From noah at neo.co.tz Thu Jun 6 09:09:12 2019 From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 12:09:12 +0300 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Complain to NoMCOM In-Reply-To: <981D92F0-0CC9-49CA-BC59-65F6CEFD02E2@pch.net> References: <981D92F0-0CC9-49CA-BC59-65F6CEFD02E2@pch.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 11:38 AM Bill Woodcock wrote: > Those all seem like very reasonable suggestions. > Indeed Bill Running a nomcom can be hard, > I can imagine and we ought to appreciate the efforts from volunteers who take their time to do this. but with concrete procedural guidelines like the ones just suggested, it > can be made easier and more predictable. I?ve run a lot of nomcoms, and > been on still more, and structure helps immensely to set everyone?s > expectations and keep things running smoothly. > And just to add that even with guidelines, they are not cast on stones which is why there will always be room for improvement as we move forward. Cheers, Noah -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com Thu Jun 6 09:25:50 2019 From: taiwo.oyewande88 at gmail.com (Taiwo Oyewande) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 10:25:50 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Complain to NoMCOM In-Reply-To: <981D92F0-0CC9-49CA-BC59-65F6CEFD02E2@pch.net> References: <981D92F0-0CC9-49CA-BC59-65F6CEFD02E2@pch.net> Message-ID: Dear all, I find myself in the same shoes as Abdulkarim. I sent out my Application for the PDWG co-chair in due time, waiting to see the shortlisted candidates. When the shortlisted candidates were released, I felt I didn?t qualify for some reason. On trying to check if NOMCOM sent me a mail stating why I wouldn?t be shortlisted at this time, i stumbled on a mail from a personal gmail address in my spam requesting some more information for my PDWG co-chair application. Since then i have been trying to make contact with the committee via phone and email. But we haven?t been able to come to a resolve. I think it is unfair to give a 24hr deadline to send documents for such a position. I am of the strong opinion that the NOMCOM will like to produce the best candidates to emerge as co-chairs. This can only be achieved through a fair procedure. I will appreciate if this flaw can be reviewed and amended to make room for better competition and the emergence of the best candidates as co-chairs On this note I will like to commend the work of the NomCom so far. I am sure the job has not been easy. With a little improvement, a lot of great things will be achieved. Kind Regards Taiwo Oyewande > On 6 Jun 2019, at 08:01, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > Those all seem like very reasonable suggestions. > > Running a nomcom can be hard, but with concrete procedural guidelines like the ones just suggested, it can be made easier and more predictable. I?ve run a lot of nomcoms, and been on still more, and structure helps immensely to set everyone?s expectations and keep things running smoothly. > > -Bill > > >> On Jun 6, 2019, at 08:47, ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE wrote: >> >> Dear all >> >> I one of the those who have spent a considerable amount of time in preparing my application for the position of the AFRINIC policy chair, unfortunately, I didn?t get listed. Am sending this email just to clarify and correct the situation as I believe NOMCOM is out to a good job >> >> I checked my email today after being on holiday for Ramadan. Ramadan is a period where Muslims fast and it can be stressful but it is a period I take some time out of my stressful schedule to have a relationship with my creator. On checking my email I realised my name was not on the announcement list as a candidate (Slate) and I was shocked as I didn?t know why this has happened. on one hand, I felt maybe NOMCOM felt I was not good enough and I went on with my life. >> Later in the day, I checked my junk email and found that an email was sent earlier confirming the submission of my application asking for some personal documents. The email address used was a Gmail account. This email was sent last Sunday asking for the documents with a deadline for Monday. So I was wondering if the mail has even come into the normal box NOMCOM expected that candidates should provide personal information and documents within ONE day. They forgot it?s a weekend and people might also be on holiday. There was nothin asking me not to proceed on holiday after submitting the application. All required documents should have been asked during the application process. Again there was no reminder email. I believe NOMCOM should have used an official account not a random Gmail account to prevent filters seeing them as junk. >> I have now provided all the documents that were requested and I believe the application should be reconsidered >> I have respect for NONCOM and its members but I just feel I needed to send this so that NOMCOM can correct its mistakes as no one is perfect. >> I think its also unfair if this is not corrected. >> Candidates should be allowed to make their own decision to run or not as long as they are eligible. >> Furthermore, for the future, I would like to suggest the following >> 1. All information required to verify a candidates eligibility should be published well in advance of the nominating period. >> 2. Candidates should be required to submit all of that information within 30 days after being nominated, prior to the nominating committee?s consideration of their candidacy. >> 3. Requests for additional information from the nominating committee should occur only in exceptional circumstances. In such a case, the request shall give each candidate at least 10 days to respond. >> 4. All communications between the nominating committee and candidates should use an official address reserved for the nominating committee. >> >> >> Thank you >> >> -- >> Abdulkarim A.Oloyede. >> >> Website, Weekly Bulletin UGPortal PGPortal >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 sfolayan at skannet.com Thu Jun 6 09:36:45 2019 From: sfolayan at skannet.com (Sunday Folayan) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 10:36:45 +0100 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Nomcom request for feedback In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi NomCOM Chair, Good job so far, much more your efforts to correct whatever imperfections may exist. It is a learning process. Just a post-mortem: It is more important to get as many good candidates as possible, indeed willing volunteers, than reduce/restrict the candidates. It is also important to give the membership base the opportunity to select, than restrict their choice with one person on the slate. The candidates could have been contacted by Telephone, and even Whatsapp, + "friends of friends",? considering the urgency involved. Email alone, is indeed not "best effort". Moving forward: Indeed, NOMCOM can prospect and contact those they think can serve on the Board and other positions, and politely ask them to be so nominated. Two is good but three is better. On the co-chairs, Normally, the PDWG co-chair elections are staggered, so that the two chairs do not leave in the same year. This is to retain experience and have a smooth transition. Since the situation of having the two stand for election in the same year is coming up now, and the tenures are 1 year and 2 years, then the candidate with the highest vote can be considered elected for the two year term, and the next elected candidate will be for the 1 year term. Thank you for all your efforts, and all the best. Sunday. On 06/06/2019 08:09, Iyedi Goma wrote: > > Dear community, > > > Veuillez trouvez la version fran?aise ci dessous. > > > The nomination committee received a question about the process for the > election of two PDWG co-chairs as one of the open seats is for a > two-year team and the other open seat is for a one-year term. The > nomination committee contacted the Afrinic elections committee to > request the process document for the elections. The nomination > committee was informed that there isn?t any documented process for the > election of two PDWG co-chairs. > > > The nomination committee recommends ?that the process for the election > of the two PDWG co-chairs should be documented so that the working > group understand how ?the process works. > > > There were nine nominations for the two the PDWG co-chair seats.? > After reviewing the nominations, the nomination committee found that > ?there only four candidates who submitted the required information > before the endtime. The nomination committee was contacted by four > other nominees ?as their names did not appear in the announcement > which was sent to the RPD mailing list. > > > The nomination committee would like to solicit the feedback of the > PDWG on the above by Friday 7 ?of June at 23:59 UTC > > > > > Cher membre de la communaut? > > > Le comit? de nomination avait re?u une question d?un membre de la > communaut? lors d?une session de sensibilisation sur le processus de > r?partition des deux postes ?de co-pr?sidence pour le PDWG. Il est > important de souligner que les deux mandatures ne poss?dent pas la > m?me dur?e, un poste pour une ann?e et une seconde pour deux ann?es, > la question est celle de savoir comment on attribue les postes ? > chacun des postulants. > > Au regard de l'importance de la question le comit? de nomination avait > contact? AFRINIC pour comprendre s?il y avait des documents ?qui > soutenaient ledit processus. Ce que nous avons compris de la r?ponse > du comit? d? ?lection qu il existe pas de proc?dure ?crite proprement > dite. > > > Le comit? de nomination recommande fortement que le processus > ?lectoral ?soit r?dig? et valid? afin de faciliter la t?che du groupe > de travail. > > > > En ce qui concerne les candidatures pour les ?lections ?de la > co-pr?sidence du PDWG , le comit? de nomination avait re?u neuf > pr?tendus candidatures. Apr?s la phase de ?collecte d'information > suppl?mentaire nous avons re?us que quatres dossiers de candidatures. > Apr?s la publication des candidatures le comit? de nomination a ?t? > contact? par quatre des autres pr?tendus ?et ils ont soumis leur dossiers. > > > Dans le souci de transparence et d??quit? nous souhaitons solliciter > l?avis du PDWG sur les ?l?ments ?voqu?s. Le comit? de nomination > souhaiterait avoir votre retour d?ici ce vendredi 7 juin ? 23h59 TUC. > > > > > Serge-Parfait Goma > > > Afrinic 2019 Nomcom Chair > > > > _______________________________________________ > RPD mailing list > RPD at afrinic.net > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From paulm at faircape.co.za Thu Jun 6 09:41:28 2019 From: paulm at faircape.co.za (Paul McMaster) Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2019 11:41:28 +0200 Subject: [Community-Discuss] [rpd] Complain to NoMCOM In-Reply-To: References: <981D92F0-0CC9-49CA-BC59-65F6CEFD02E2@pch.net> Message-ID: Frankly this is not a flaw, but incompetence. If I was a conspiracy buff, one would wonder many things..... On Thu, 6 Jun 2019 at 11:26, Taiwo Oyewande wrote: > Dear all, > > I find myself in the same shoes as Abdulkarim. I sent out my Application > for the PDWG co-chair in due time, waiting to see the shortlisted > candidates. When the shortlisted candidates were released, I felt I didn?t > qualify for some reason. On trying to check if NOMCOM sent me a mail > stating why I wouldn?t be shortlisted at this time, i stumbled on a mail > from a personal gmail address in my spam requesting some more information > for my PDWG co-chair application. Since then i have been trying to make > contact with the committee via phone and email. But we haven?t been able to > come to a resolve. > > I think it is unfair to give a 24hr deadline to send documents for such a > position. > > I am of the strong opinion that the NOMCOM will like to produce the best > candidates to emerge as co-chairs. This can only be achieved through a fair > procedure. > > I will appreciate if this flaw can be reviewed and amended to make room > for better competition and the emergence of the best candidates as co-chairs > > On this note I will like to commend the work of the NomCom so far. I am > sure the job has not been easy. With a little improvement, a lot of great > things will be achieved. > > Kind Regards > > Taiwo Oyewande > > > > > > On 6 Jun 2019, at 08:01, Bill Woodcock wrote: > > Those all seem like very reasonable suggestions. > > Running a nomcom can be hard, but with concrete procedural guidelines like > the ones just suggested, it can be made easier and more predictable. I?ve > run a lot of nomcoms, and been on still more, and structure helps immensely > to set everyone?s expectations and keep things running smoothly. > > -Bill > > > On Jun 6, 2019, at 08:47, ABDULKARIM AYOPO OLOYEDE < > oloyede.aa at unilorin.edu.ng> wrote: > > Dear all > > I one of the those who have spent a considerable amount of time in > preparing my application for the position of the AFRINIC policy chair, > unfortunately, I didn?t get listed. Am sending this email just to clarify > and correct the situation as I believe NOMCOM is out to a good job > > I checked my email today after being on holiday for Ramadan. Ramadan is a > period where Muslims fast and it can be stressful but it is a period I take > some time out of my stressful schedule to have a relationship with my > creator. On checking my email I realised my name was not on the > announcement list as a candidate (Slate) and I was shocked as I didn?t know > why this has happened. on one hand, I felt maybe NOMCOM felt I was not good > enough and I went on with my life. > Later in the day, I checked my junk email and found that an email was sent > earlier confirming the submission of my application asking for some > personal documents. The email address used was a Gmail account. This email > was sent last Sunday asking for the documents with a deadline for Monday. > So I was wondering if the mail has even come into the normal box NOMCOM > expected that candidates should provide personal information and documents > within ONE day. They forgot it?s a weekend and people might also be on > holiday. There was nothin asking me not to proceed on holiday after > submitting the application. All required documents should have been asked > during the application process. Again there was no reminder email. I > believe NOMCOM should have used an official account not a random Gmail > account to prevent filters seeing them as junk. > I have now provided all the documents that were requested and I believe > the application should be reconsidered > I have respect for NONCOM and its members but I just feel I needed to send > this so that NOMCOM can correct its mistakes as no one is perfect. > I think its also unfair if this is not corrected. > Candidates should be allowed to make their own decision to run or not as > long as they are eligible. > Furthermore, for the future, I would like to suggest the following > 1. All information required to verify a candidates eligibility should > be published well in advance of the nominating period. > 2. Candidates should be required to submit all of that information > within 30 days after being nominated, prior to the nominating committee?s > consideration of their candidacy. > 3. Requests for additional information from the nominating committee > should occur only in exceptional circumstances. In such a case, the request > shall give each candidate at least 10 days to respond. > 4. All communications between the nominating committee and candidates > should use an official address reserved for the nominating committee. > > > Thank you > > -- > * Abdulkarim A.Oloyede*. > > Website , Weekly Bulletin >