From mark at tinka.africa  Tue Nov 16 04:30:44 2021
From: mark at tinka.africa (Mark Tinka)
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 06:30:44 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: [APRICOT-PC-Chairs] APRICOT 2022 Call for
	Presentations
In-Reply-To: <7992a3ae-b930-7686-a646-796c65cb26f4@apricot.net>
References: <7992a3ae-b930-7686-a646-796c65cb26f4@apricot.net>
Message-ID: <0cc7c979-7cdd-cfab-4101-54be7bd3a28e@tinka.africa>

FYI.

Mark.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	[APRICOT-PC-Chairs] APRICOT 2022 Call for Presentations
Date: 	Thu, 7 Oct 2021 21:16:43 +1000
From: 	Philip Smith <philip at apricot.net>
Reply-To: 	APRICOT PC Chairs <pc-chairs at apricot.net>
Organization: 	Asia Pacific Regional Conference on Operational Technologies
To: 	apops at apops.net
CC: 	APRICOT PC Chairs <pc-chairs at apricot.net>



Hi everyone,

Please find below the call for presentations for APRICOT 2022! :-)

Best wishes,

philip
--

APRICOT 2022
21st February - 3rd March, Online
https://2022.apricot.net

CALL FOR PRESENTATIONS
======================

The APRICOT 2022 Programme Committee is now seeking contributions for
Presentations and Tutorials for the APRICOT 2022 Conference.

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;

Please submit on-line at:

http://papers.apricot.net/user/login.php?event=142

Tutorials will take place during the week of 21st February.
Conference sessions and the Peering Forum will take place on the week
of 28th February. All APRICOT 2022 session times will be one hour
long, with up to four sessions scheduled per day.

CONFERENCE MILESTONES
---------------------

Call for Papers Opens: Now
Initial Draft Programme: 6th December 2021
Final Deadline for Submissions: 31st January 2022
Final Program Published: 7th February 2022
Final Slides Received: 14th February 2022

*SLOTS ARE FILLED ON A FIRST COME, FIRST SERVED BASIS, REGARDLESS OF
PUBLISHED DEADLINES*

PROGRAMME CONTENT
-----------------

The APRICOT Conference Programme consists of three parts, these being
Tutorials, the Peering Forum, and Conference Sessions.

Topics proposed must be relevant to Internet Operations and Technologies:

- IPv4 / IPv6 Routing and Operations
- Internet backbone operations
- Routing Security, including RPKI and MANRS
- Peering, Interconnects and IXPs
- Network Function Virtualisaton
- Network Automation/Programming
- Content Distribution Network technology & operations
- Research on Internet Operations and Deployment
- Network infrastructure security
- IPv6 deployment on fixed and Wireless/Cellular networks
- DNS / DNSSEC
- Access and Transport Technologies
- Content & Service Delivery and "Cloud Computing"


PEERING FORUM
-------------

Due to APRICOT 2022 being held online, the PC will only accept Peering
Personals prior to the event starting. Submissions must be of a
single slide listing the operator's PeeringDB entry. Please refer to
https://tinyurl.com/y46954n5 for how to create a successful Peering
Personal presentation.


CfP SUBMISSION
--------------

Draft slides for both tutorials and conference sessions MUST be
provided with CfP submissions otherwise the submission 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.
Slides must be of original work, preferably not presented before at
other venues, with all company confidential marks removed.

Final slides are to be provided by the specified deadline for
publication on the APRICOT 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 to
the PC sooner rather than later.

For any questions or concerns, please email the PC Chairs.

We look forward to receiving your presentation proposals.

Mark Tinka, Tugsorshikh Badarch & Marijana Novakovic
Co-Chairs, APRICOT 2022 Programme Committee
--

-- 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email topc-chairs+unsubscribe at apricot.net.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211116/ebc9581b/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Wed Nov 17 22:25:26 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 01:25:26 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] Fwd: IPv4 fraud case ends
In-Reply-To: <B92799A8-CF7B-4F65-8371-1440F2EBC6AB@sandiford.com>
References: <08f001d7dbf9$0b2a7330$217f5990$@iptrading.com>
 <B92799A8-CF7B-4F65-8371-1440F2EBC6AB@sandiford.com>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYLdyT_RBDqjeEr4-9pr3KbX9+HuOsw7E+7=_8Ho8fTRA@mail.gmail.com>

Folks

FYI, This could be a worthwhile read.

Noah


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Bill Sandiford <bill at sandiford.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021, 00:53
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 fraud case ends
To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>
Cc: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net>


Thanks for this Mike.

An excellent job by the prosecution, the entire ARIN team, and those that
acted as expert witnesses for the prosecution ;)

Here is another copy of the link:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/executive-pleads-guilty-in-internet-address-fraud-case-11637101781?st=yyid20syyvb0mw2&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Regards,
Bill


On Nov 17, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/executive-pleads-guilty-in-internet-address-fraud-case-11637101781

In this case of fraud to acquire resources the perpetrator pled guilty to
all charges.

Regards,
Mike Burns
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211118/7c8b08c4/attachment.html>

From jcurran at arin.net  Thu Nov 18 14:57:13 2021
From: jcurran at arin.net (John Curran)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 14:57:13 +0000
Subject: [Community-Discuss] IPv4 fraud case ends
In-Reply-To: <CAEqgTWYLdyT_RBDqjeEr4-9pr3KbX9+HuOsw7E+7=_8Ho8fTRA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <08f001d7dbf9$0b2a7330$217f5990$@iptrading.com>
 <B92799A8-CF7B-4F65-8371-1440F2EBC6AB@sandiford.com>
 <CAEqgTWYLdyT_RBDqjeEr4-9pr3KbX9+HuOsw7E+7=_8Ho8fTRA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AF956367-2290-48BD-889F-4E12CADB4261@arin.net>

Yes - reference official press release from US DoJ - https://www.justice.gov/usao-sc/pr/tech-company-and-ceo-plead-guilty-twenty-counts-wire-fraud-mid-trial

FYI,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


On 17 Nov 2021, at 5:25 PM, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz<mailto:noah at neo.co.tz>> wrote:

Folks

FYI, This could be a worthwhile read.

Noah


---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Bill Sandiford <bill at sandiford.com<mailto:bill at sandiford.com>>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021, 00:53
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 fraud case ends
To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com<mailto:mike at iptrading.com>>
Cc: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>


Thanks for this Mike.

An excellent job by the prosecution, the entire ARIN team, and those that acted as expert witnesses for the prosecution ;)

Here is another copy of the link:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/executive-pleads-guilty-in-internet-address-fraud-case-11637101781?st=yyid20syyvb0mw2&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

Regards,
Bill


On Nov 17, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com<mailto:mike at iptrading.com>> wrote:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/executive-pleads-guilty-in-internet-address-fraud-case-11637101781

In this case of fraud to acquire resources the perpetrator pled guilty to all charges.

Regards,
Mike Burns


_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
Community-Discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:Community-Discuss at afrinic.net>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211118/baef4fd1/attachment.html>

From noah at neo.co.tz  Thu Nov 18 16:53:17 2021
From: noah at neo.co.tz (Noah)
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 19:53:17 +0300
Subject: [Community-Discuss] IPv4 fraud case ends
In-Reply-To: <AF956367-2290-48BD-889F-4E12CADB4261@arin.net>
References: <08f001d7dbf9$0b2a7330$217f5990$@iptrading.com>
 <B92799A8-CF7B-4F65-8371-1440F2EBC6AB@sandiford.com>
 <CAEqgTWYLdyT_RBDqjeEr4-9pr3KbX9+HuOsw7E+7=_8Ho8fTRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <AF956367-2290-48BD-889F-4E12CADB4261@arin.net>
Message-ID: <CAEqgTWYEFV+BHnB2t2YjNAoOMufRZqoVQWoXr87Rafwze0AJ-Q@mail.gmail.com>

Dear John

Thanks for sharing as there is a lot to learn from this in our region in
terms of implications and consequences.

The precedence is very important albeit from a different region.

Cheers
Noah

On Thu, 18 Nov 2021, 18:03 John Curran, <jcurran at arin.net> wrote:

> Yes - reference official press release from US DoJ -
> https://www.justice.gov/usao-sc/pr/tech-company-and-ceo-plead-guilty-twenty-counts-wire-fraud-mid-trial
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> American Registry for Internet Numbers
>
>
> On 17 Nov 2021, at 5:25 PM, Noah <noah at neo.co.tz> wrote:
>
> Folks
>
> FYI, This could be a worthwhile read.
>
> Noah
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: Bill Sandiford <bill at sandiford.com>
> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021, 00:53
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] IPv4 fraud case ends
> To: Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com>
> Cc: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net>
>
>
> Thanks for this Mike.
>
> An excellent job by the prosecution, the entire ARIN team, and those that
> acted as expert witnesses for the prosecution ;)
>
> Here is another copy of the link:
>
>
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/executive-pleads-guilty-in-internet-address-fraud-case-11637101781?st=yyid20syyvb0mw2&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
>
> Regards,
> Bill
>
>
> On Nov 17, 2021, at 4:21 PM, Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com> wrote:
>
>
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/executive-pleads-guilty-in-internet-address-fraud-case-11637101781
>
> In this case of fraud to acquire resources the perpetrator pled guilty to
> all charges.
>
> Regards,
> Mike Burns
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211118/9fb41663/attachment.html>

From hjul.paul at gmail.com  Mon Nov 29 12:59:49 2021
From: hjul.paul at gmail.com (Paul Hjul)
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 14:59:49 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
In-Reply-To: <7505bbe906401c395611c5729efccae9@togorer.tg>
References: <CAF4kYptV505Wy7SyP2X4vBMvJ5jocAKOHLVUks+zCgrDu7aScQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <7505bbe906401c395611c5729efccae9@togorer.tg>
Message-ID: <CAF4kYptfMmFupyyxJ98EQBJf9L2AkoymAvgQEgKVhLXz=x6pqA@mail.gmail.com>

I think you are misreading the Mauritius Companies Act and without
realizing it you've actually agreed with me

The text of section 354:
  354. Arbitration (1) A company may, by writing under the hand of the
director where the company has one director or where the company has 2 or
more directors, under the hands of at least 2 directors, agree to refer and
may refer, to arbitration, in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure,
any existing or future dispute between itself and any other company or
person. (2) Every company which is party to an arbitration may delegate to
the arbitrator power to settle any term or to determine any matter capable
of being lawfully  settled or determined by the company itself or by its
directors or other governing body.

The Company - that is AfriNIC has the power to bind itself to arbitration.
There is no power afforded to somebody who has a dispute with the Company
to invoke... There is nothing to invoke by an applicant. At most somebody
who is going to take AfriNIC to court could do is have their attorneys in
writting propose referal but with AfriNIC already have declared that
members must take it to court that is a fools erand. Until the Board issues
a statement that it will refer matters to arbitration the profer from a
plaintiff is a waste of their breath. As I've repeatedly said the Board can
agree to refer the disputes which are bogging the organization down to
arbitration if any of the counterparties refuse to agree then litigate out
those cases but you've got fewer cases already. If you are reading in that
section 354 must be or can be invoked by a party other than the Company
itself then you are misreading the statute.

I also think your appeal to ICP-2 is misplaced for one very simple reason:
"All organisations that receive service from the new RIR must be treated
equally. The policies and guidelines proposed and implemented by the RIR
need to ensure fair distribution of resources, and impartial treatment of
the members/requestors.
The new RIR should be established as an independent, not-for-profit and
open membership association."

The fundamental problem with AfriNIC right now is that the appearance of
bias against certain resource members is impossible to refute until the
Board repudiates same malice against certain members and is seen to adhere
to the principles of natural justice there is a problem.

Further the entire discourse of ICP-2 is against fragmentation which is
exactly what the refusal to have an inter-RIR transfer practice
accomplishes. There is a faction within AfriNIC that is at odds with the
global nature of the Internet and who are the perpetual cause of problems
in Africa. This merry band have found their scapegoat and are trying to
keep a distraction going.


I fear that unfortunately ICP-2 had lofty goals set forth that needed to be
complied with in order to see the establishment of AfriNIC and that while
lip service and checklist compliance was met many of the criteria around
cohesive community support were plastered in. It is certainly a tall order
for anybody to try to get a region of Africa to become its own RIR but I
don't actually know how ICANN will respond to a dissolution of an
organization which serves as the RIR following activity that was in
conflict with the intent of ICP-2. You also appear to be harbouring the
belief that I want Afrinic dissolved, I don't I want it fixed and fixed
enough that it just works and I don't have to care about it.

On Mon, 29 Nov 2021 at 14:10, <arnaud.amelina at togorer.tg> wrote:

> Hi Paul,
>
>  From all I?ve read so far, the plaintiff never invoked section 354 of
> the company act to refer the dispute to arbitration and AFRINIC did not
> object to it. AFRINIC was instead dragged into court and forced to
> resist.
>
> Acting in good faith, if you want to wind down AFRINIC Ltd and get
> another organization to take over, why don't you engage the membership
> and convince them to put the company into liquidation as per Bylaws
> provisions?
>
> But before you get there you must first convince the AFRINIC community
> and the global Internet community since AFRINIC was formed by Community
> consensus through ICP-2 to become a regional RIR.
>
> These countless courts attacks serve different motives from the actors
> which are clearly and publicly known.
>
> --
> Arnaud
>
> On 2021-11-26 15:58, Paul Hjul wrote:
> > I am pretty sure all SA based members respect the rights of all other
> > members. At least I hope that is the case. It's not clear to me though
> > whether any actual member - with the person posting on behalf of the
> > organization that is a member - are actually advocating that Afrinic's
> > board continue with a course of disrespecting the rights of members. I
> > say this because for all the noise and bullshit that has come out
> > today - the whole idea of the Afrinic by-laws over-riding Mauritius
> > law was jarring to say the least - nobody has stepped forward and said
> > On behalf of member X it is proposed that the Board infringe on the
> > rights of members.
> >
> > Individuals who could well be speaking in their personal capacity and
> > who have a history of tribalist utterances in this community should
> > not be equated with anything other than dirty tricks.
> >
> > To test my belief that South African instiutions are not aligned with
> > Afrinic behaving in this manner I'll be seeking to put it on ZADNAs
> > SGM meeting next week's agenda. Unlike Afrinic ZADNA does actually
> > have a statutory endorsed position and of course its membership has a
> > big overlap to Afrinic resource members in South Africa.
> >
> > There is no reason why Afrinic doesn't get the principal litigation
> > expedited or handled by arbitration, if that litigation goes the way
> > of the plaintiff then either stop with this nonsense of trying to
> > infringe on their rights as found by the courts or accept that
> > dissolution is inevitable and work towards identifying a successor to
> > perform the vital roles at issue.
> >
> > From: Alan Levin <alan at vanilla.co.za>
> > Sent: Friday, 26 November 2021 13:55
> > To: Ben Roberts <Ben.Roberts at liquid.tech>
> > Cc: AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> > Subject: Re: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > We would definitely support Ben and Liquid on this, I suspect most of
> > the SA ISPs will be respecting the rights of all members. You
> > definitely can't boot Liquid if they sue you!
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 10:48 AM Ben Roberts via Members-Discuss
> > <members-discuss at afrinic.net<mailto:members-discuss at afrinic.net>>
> > wrote:
> > Noah,
> > Thanks for this idea.  I would not support it however since it might
> > compromise the rights of members in case of any arising current or
> > future dispute that any member has against AFRINIC..
> >
> > It is best that Afrinic and the member have their arguments in a court
> > of law.  I am no legal expert but I would imagine that the primary
> > case should be treated as priority.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > Ben
> > _______________________________________________
> > Members-Discuss mailing list
> > Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211129/323767b8/attachment.html>

From hjul.paul at gmail.com  Tue Nov 30 07:46:37 2021
From: hjul.paul at gmail.com (Paul Hjul)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 09:46:37 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
In-Reply-To: <8B14B5C0-8CAE-43A5-B9D3-4922A3636DEA@nftconsult.com>
References: <CAF4kYpsWEaifx-QT4wqaPi0KCoN3588JsMLP0zYoOip=uKzcPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0E4C8832-B952-42E2-9D91-0299D606D16D@nftconsult.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64516252D393506989632671EE669@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <51F1140F-A380-40FF-AE35-14BB298C0E4E@nftconsult.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64514B80D812535C5207CC07EE669@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWZXjNSOqpcHaSGKN_8546x2wg6B3k7W1-fcUCNOMNqG2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB6451FF1ED8DB9134F3ABD3AAEE679@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAF4kYpumVro+m7+s_4BmpOYZvdkSCT4xppxUZE+7f8pCZmBKKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CWLP123MB642893F47D4B0F2449784505AA679@CWLP123MB6428.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D4620BF6BCDDA9759FE8EE679@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <8B14B5C0-8CAE-43A5-B9D3-4922A3636DEA@nftconsult.com>
Message-ID: <CAF4kYpugSYqmBBzLbiu+TcsSKyDKBbn6-QxktbO8dd=ZL90msA@mail.gmail.com>

It would help if you know what "ad homimen" meant.

An arguendo ad hominem is a logical fallacy in which an appeal to the
attributes of the person is made.

Presumably you are cop-ping to having been the chair whose departure
enabled a surplus. Does that mean you are alleging that after you left the
Board cut a dirty deal to improve the organizations finances?

Andrew could have called you a total moron and it wouldn't be an ad
hominem. It would be a personal attack and contrary to the community
standards for which Andrew would be censured in some shape or form but it
would not be an ad hominem. Also because the censure would follow wholly
from the personal attack aspect and be wholly disconnected from the crux of
the argument it wouldn't matter if it was entirely true or not.
What Andrew could not do without being guilty of an ad hominem is to say
that you'd only make the argument which you do because of your political
affiliations.


On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, 09:35 Badru Ntege, <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com> wrote:

> ? need to invoke that big word ?ad hominem?
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: signature_2058268178]
>
>
>
> *From: *Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 30 November 2021 at 10:27
> *To: *Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>, Paul Hjul <
> hjul.paul at gmail.com>
> *Cc: *Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>, AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *RE: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
> Badru,
>
>
>
> Can I suggest you go back and take a class in maths 101.
>
>
>
> Said member pays an annual fee of $38,400 a year ? and some how ? in your
> mind the million dollar a year surplus is derived from a $38,400 a year
> additional revenue?  Wow ? I want to live in your world where I get $38,400
> and end up with a million dollars.
>
>
>
> Reality is ? most of the surplus came when the chair of the board and the
> former ceo were changed ? unfortunately without a forensic audit to see
> what was happening while they were there ? its hard to point directly at
> where the losses were coming from
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:17 AM
> *To:* Paul Hjul <hjul.paul at gmail.com>; Andrew Alston <
> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>; AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
> We must all note that the financial surplus being boasted on here was a
> result of allowing a non region entity to get allocated more resources than
> most African countries have.
>
>
>
> This was done as many members questioned what was going on and the current
> crisis and court cases could be very easily linked to those decisions.
> I?m not insinuating but pondering.
>
>
>
> So it?s best we focus on how we fix the current reality and not dig up the
> past.
>
>
>
> We have bylaws we need to follow them.   If they are missing I repeat we
> need to use our PDP to fix.   We follow the bylaws without calls for
> dispute resolution.
>
>
>
> There?s no dispute but simply a few who believe throwing money arround
> fixes everything.
>
>
>
> Everyone in the AfriNIC region has a right to the resources rich or poor.
>   It?s never been about the corporates but the individual.
>
>
>
> Let me get off my soap box :-) for now.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Get Outlook for iOS <https://aka.ms/o0ukef>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Paul Hjul <hjul.paul at gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:04:12 AM
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>; Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>;
> AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
> What is all the graver a problem is that the archive is replete with Noah
> embarking on ad hominem, spurious, xenophobic, tribalist and toxic
> distractions. Yet time and time again there is a failure to enforce any
> community standards.  In fact you or I are more likely to get red carded
> for hurting the feelings of dishonest malcontents.
>
>
>
> Just to pick up on something interesting here. There was a time when
> AfriNICs biggest internal threat was financial mismanagement. Once that
> boat was fixed the path to sustained surpluses was setup it was important
> to then make sure that the organization stuck with good practices and that
> it didn't become a surplus hording monster. Today the biggest internal
> threat to the organization is a de facto board strategy of riding roughshod
> over resource members commercial rights with an apparent goal of reclaiming
> for AfriNIC a cache of IPv4 address blocks - for which there is no cogent
> policy for distribution (the soft landing policy presumes a shortage which
> the reclaiming repudiate). If I recall from the archives correctly there
> was a lot of resistance to fixing the ship.
>
>
>
> I haven't quite been able to pick up to what extent the numnuts who caused
> an earlier financial crisis are now in the wings hoping to be beneficiaries
> of financial largesse which they hope can be attained through the
> organization discriminating against members.  If it is the case that they
> are the same people then I am afraid AfriNICs surface problems will shift
> and manifest into different symptoms all covering up the real problem.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2021, 08:37 Andrew Alston, <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> wrote:
>
> 100% I am the same man ? and for that I make NO apologies.
>
>
>
> AfriNIC is a monopoly because of its lack of transfer policy ? something
> that I have pushed for years ? including while I was on the board to
> rectify this situation.
>
>
>
> I stand by when I ran for the board ? and I did it ? because at that point
> ? AfriNIC was closing in on bankruptcy ? go and look at the financials ?
> zero reserve ? clocking 10s of thousands of dollars a year in losses.  When
> I left the board ? we?d turned over a million-dollar surplus and were well
> on the way to getting financial stability (though unfortunately even that
> now is in a situation where the organization contains to make vast amounts
> of money far beyond what it was meant to)
>
>
>
> Is AfriNIC a monopoly? 100% it is ? does that need to be fixed ? 100% does
> it does ? does it have anything to do with me being on the board? Hell no
> it doesn?t ? and quite frankly Noah, your distraction and obfuscation and
> ad-hominem attacks to distract from the fallacy of your own arguments is
> nothing short of eye wateringly amusing and shows just how low you have
> sunk ? when your arguments fail ? throw stinky brown stuff into the fan and
> hope some of the resulting mess sticks.
>
>
>
> Grow up
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Noah <noah at neo.co.tz>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 29, 2021 6:36 PM
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Cc:* Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>; Paul Hjul <
> hjul.paul at gmail.com>; AfriNIC Discuss <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> Are you the same individual who asked the membership years ago to vote for
> you, so that you can serve as a board director of AFRINIC?
>
>
>
> The same AFRINIC you refer to as a monopoly?
>
>
>
> Noah
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 29 Nov 2021, 10:26 Andrew Alston via Members-Discuss, <
> members-discuss at afrinic.net> wrote:
>
> Telecom regulatory authorities are state ? therefore exempt from
> monopolies acts and anti-trust action under the law.
>
> ICANN ? well actually not exactly ? because the RIR?s have the choice to
> use someone else if they wish to since the transition if my understanding
> is correct (someone can correct me if I am wrong)
>
> RIR?s are defacto monopolies in the absence of transfer policies ? once
> they have transfer policies ? they are no longer monopolies since anyone
> can transfer anywhere.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>
> *Sent:* Monday, November 29, 2021 10:08 AM
> *To:* Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>; Paul Hjul <
> hjul.paul at gmail.com>; members-discuss at afrinic.net
> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I?m hearing interesting messages from people who fought ITU (government)
> entering the business of the internet so vehemently only a few years ago.
>
>
>
> Every Telecom regulatory  Authority is a national monopoly because that?s
> how we get the universal service and ensure equitable service delivery in
> our individual countries.   ICANN one would say is a defacto Monopoly.
> RIR?s are defacto Monopolies ??.and the argument can continue.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Badru
>
>
>
> *From: *Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
> *Date: *Monday, 29 November 2021 at 09:34
> *To: *Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>, Paul Hjul <
> hjul.paul at gmail.com>, "members-discuss at afrinic.net" <
> members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *RE: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
> We also have a situation where AfriNIC is a defacto monopoly ? very likely
> in contravention of anti-trust statutes ? the very fastest way to get that
> tested ? is the day that a monopoly denies service to an African entity
> because it chose to go to court to have its issues addressed.
>
>
>
> Then again ? maybe forcing the hand and forcing the anti-trust issue so
> that its settled may not be such a bad idea ? it may resolve several things.
>
>
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, November 28, 2021 8:01 AM
> *To:* Paul Hjul <hjul.paul at gmail.com>; members-discuss at afrinic.net
> *Subject:* Re: [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
>
>
> @Paul Hjul <hjul.paul at gmail.com>
>
>
>
> You have every right to your opinion on the way forward and so do I.
>
>
>
> For your information I have been a member of AfriNIC from its inception
> and still are today.
>
>
>
> But let me remind you that not being a resource member does not limit me
> from having an opinion.   I speak as a member of the community who also
> happens to be a resource member.
>
>
>
> let?s do a hypothetical here.
>
>
>
> Would you opt to go into dispute resolution if you caught a thief
> red-handed in your house ??.  I know or hope you would not take the law in
> your hands but you would let the existing law take its due course.
>
>
>
> The proposition here is very simple.  AfriNIC the organization has its
> rules pertaining to who can and cannot be a member.  It also has rules on
> how one continues to be a member.
>
>
>
> All we are asking is that the Board and Legal teams investigate whether
> our internal laws have been broken and if they have been broken to follow
> what rules of behavior we all signed up to and the consequences therein.
>
>
>
> What I hear from you and I might be wrong here is that even though our
> rules might have been broken, we should not follow the rules but we should
> go into dispute resolution with a perpetrator who has shown very clearly
> more than once that the survival of AfriNIC is not in their interest.
>
>
>
> And what I hear from others is that following the set rule would set a
> precedence for this rule to be used again in future. ??????    But if I?m
> not wrong that?s what rules and code?s of conduct are made.
>
>
>
> We need to be objective here.
>
>
>
> Lets allow other differing opinions to guide us
>
>
>
> But we also have a process of changing rules that we think do not help the
> organization and if you feel the rule Noah refers to does not help the
> organization it can be changed.    But also members who feel the current
> rule is not clear enough also have a right to propose a tougher rule after
> the experience we have gone through this year.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Paul Hjul <hjul.paul at gmail.com>
> *Date: *Saturday, 27 November 2021 at 12:30
> *To: *"members-discuss at afrinic.net" <members-discuss at afrinic.net>
> *Subject: *[members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
>
>
>
> >>Thanks Noah
>
> >>Seems like the pandemic has also affected common sense.
>
> >>We just need to remove the bad players in our membership and continue
> our journey of connecting Africa to the internet who are physically ?On
> Ground? and not ?ON Cloud?.
>
> >>These bylaw games and company Act threats have been overplayed for far
> too long.
>
> >>We as members and the community at large need to move beyond this with
> intention.
>
> >> I still support our legal teams and Board to explore what options we
> have of removing destructive members.   And if we do not have its about
> time that we made proposals to ensure the future protection of AfriNIC.
>
> >> Regards
>
>
>
> Turns out I was wrong and that there are resource members who are going to
> support the destruction of Afrinic. I still don't think that there are any
> South African members who are so inclined.
>
>
>
> If you could please let us know which resource member you are speaking for
> - this mail makes it clear that you want to speak as a member and your
> domain doesn't indicate which member that is.
>
>
>
> It is quite important that those resource members who are causing the
> problems by advocating that the organization remove members on a wrongful
> basis be identifiable.
>
>
>
> Or are you now going to claim to be speaking entirely in your personal
> capacity in which case it really should be put out to the community
>
>
>
> For what it is worth as the member Crystal Web we are in full support of
> the organization opposing (resisting is the wrong word) an action for the
> winding up of the organization on the basis that such a winding up is not
> in the interests of the members and would result in disruption to the
> global Internet. As Crystal Web we are in full support of the organization
> entering into credible dispute resolution processes with any person
> (whether a member or not) who has brought proceedings as against the
> organization before any court of law and to make a determination as to the
> basis upon which to settle any such action in accordance with sound legal
> and commercial principles and not in accordance with ideological or
> emotional preferences of whoever happens to be on the Board at the time.
> When suits that are vexatious or unmeritous are brought, we have full
> confidence that due and proper legal processes will address the matter and
> insist that the organization at all times act expeditiously in litigation
> to bring about just outcomes. As Crystal Web we are opposed to the
> organization engaging in tactics in litigation that serves to stall or
> embark on costly gamemanship in distraction of a just and proper resolution
> of the true underlying dispute.
>
>
>
> As Crystal Web we wish for the organization to adhere to its own by-laws
> except where it is credibly established on independent advice of counsel
> (having a right of audience before the Supreme Court of Mauritiu), which
> advise needs to be circulated with members that the by-law is in conflict
> with the laws of Mauritius. As Crystal Web we insist that the organization
> show proper respect and regard for the Supreme Court of Mauritius and that
> it avoid acting in a manner that could even be reasonably perceived as
> demonstrating contumen towards the courts. We insist that the laws of
> Mauritius and the principles of natural justice permeate all activity of
> the organization. As Crystal Web we insist that the organization treat its
> members fairly and in a spirit of cooperation, we are therefore gravely
> opposed to the attitude shown by in-house counsel for Afrinic in inviting
> litigation before exhausting reasonable engagements that do not put the
> organization at peril.
>
>
>
> As Crystal Web we wish that the organization would focus its efforts on
> holding accountable those persons found credibly to have engaged in
> fraudulent activity. We are opposed to the conflating legitimate commercial
> activity which may be disliked by certain factions with criminal activity
> and find it wholly unacceptable for the organization to make such
> conflation in a manner that exposes the organization to risk.
>
>
>
> Speaking as myself, if the organization sticks to these principles and
> rather considers dealing with those members and individuals in the
> community who represent the true threat to the organization - namely those
> who wish to steer the organization into a path of lawlessness - in an
> appropriate manner things will quickly come right.
>
>
>
> Paul
>
> (Crystal Web)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Members-Discuss mailing list
> Members-Discuss at afrinic.net
> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/members-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211130/da0d38d6/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 802431 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/community-discuss/attachments/20211130/da0d38d6/attachment.png>

From silber.mike at gmail.com  Tue Nov 30 10:19:36 2021
From: silber.mike at gmail.com (Mike Silber)
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2021 12:19:36 +0200
Subject: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Afrinic Court Updates
In-Reply-To: <CAF4kYpugSYqmBBzLbiu+TcsSKyDKBbn6-QxktbO8dd=ZL90msA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF4kYpsWEaifx-QT4wqaPi0KCoN3588JsMLP0zYoOip=uKzcPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <0E4C8832-B952-42E2-9D91-0299D606D16D@nftconsult.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64516252D393506989632671EE669@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <51F1140F-A380-40FF-AE35-14BB298C0E4E@nftconsult.com>
 <AM7PR03MB64514B80D812535C5207CC07EE669@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAEqgTWZXjNSOqpcHaSGKN_8546x2wg6B3k7W1-fcUCNOMNqG2Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <AM7PR03MB6451FF1ED8DB9134F3ABD3AAEE679@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAF4kYpumVro+m7+s_4BmpOYZvdkSCT4xppxUZE+7f8pCZmBKKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CWLP123MB642893F47D4B0F2449784505AA679@CWLP123MB6428.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <AM7PR03MB6451D4620BF6BCDDA9759FE8EE679@AM7PR03MB6451.eurprd03.prod.outlook.com>
 <8B14B5C0-8CAE-43A5-B9D3-4922A3636DEA@nftconsult.com>
 <CAF4kYpugSYqmBBzLbiu+TcsSKyDKBbn6-QxktbO8dd=ZL90msA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <80C81AF0-1918-428F-BA37-B9737EE011FD@gmail.com>

Hi Paul


> On 30 Nov 2021, at 09:46, Paul Hjul <hjul.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> It would help if you know what "ad homimen" meant.
> 
> An arguendo ad hominem is a logical fallacy in which an appeal to the attributes of the person is made. 

I think you mean ?argumentum ad hominem?? If you are going to take this as a teaching moment, maybe you don?t want to expose yourself [through auto-correct or ignorance/arrogance]?

Also worth noting that the argumentum ad hominem is only a fallacy in formal logic. It is quite permissible in informal logic, such as as an argument from authority including testimony and experience.

Even in formal logic, there is a suggestion that argumentum ad hominem have a place in evaluating the authority of the argument by confirming the motivation of the person making it.

Now I wonder what logical fallacy it would be when someone speaks about themselves in the plural, possibly to obscure the fact that their ISP is defunct and its continued need for address space is questionable?

Mike
(CrystalClear his own opinion)