<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Title" content="">
<meta name="Keywords" content="">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Calibri;
color:windowtext;}
span.msoIns
{mso-style-type:export-only;
mso-style-name:"";
text-decoration:underline;
color:teal;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:595.0pt 842.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Speaking in my own personal capacity.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Firstly – You don’t eliminate the risk of bought votes by limiting proxies – it makes absolutely zero difference – because the person could just as easily pay someone to vote a particular
way electronically.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Secondly – The reason that people give others proxies is often more than just votes – the voting aspect of it is just another element of the proxy that can be exercised at the same time.
Companies may well want their voices heard at an AGMM that they cannot be present at – so they issue a proxy and the individual carrying the proxy then speaks on their behalf *<b>AND</b>* votes on their behalf<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Thirdly – If we determine that the current wording in the bylaws is invalid or out of sync with the act or has giant problems with it – the only way to fix that is to the fix the bylaws
– and calling for this to be fixed won’t help until someone actually proposes new wording to fix the issue – and then sees if it will get the majority that is required for the bylaw change. Personally, having read the responses on this list – I do not see
a consensus for a proxy limitation at all – so I have my personal doubts that such a bylaw change would succeed – but it is still the only way to actually rectify the problem. (Due to the fact that for all the reasons I have stated, even if we take the act
out of the picture, the current bylaw limit is in my view invalid since proxies aren’t granted to members, they are granted to individuals).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Note: I personally will have zero issue if someone attempts to put a special resolution for anything on the floor – and I would encourage people who really believe that this is limit SHOULD
be there to do exactly that – attempt to fix the wording in the bylaws such that there is actually a legitimate limit. I just doubt it would pass a 75% majority based on what I have seen on this list so far – where I see absolutely no consensus for such a
limit.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri">Andrew<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:Calibri"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:Calibri;color:black">From: </span>
</b><span style="font-family:Calibri;color:black">Boubakar Barry <boubakarbarry@gmail.com><br>
<b>Date: </b>Tuesday, 4 October 2016 at 22:44<br>
<b>To: </b>Hytham El-Nakhal <hytham@tra.gov.eg><br>
<b>Cc: </b>"community-discuss@afrinic.net" <community-discuss@afrinic.net><br>
<b>Subject: </b>Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">In many countries, and not only in Africa, people buy votes and/or vote differently than instructed.
<br>
<br>
By limiting the number of proxies one can carry, we won't eliminate this risk, but we would at least reduce it.<br>
<br>
I don't understand the logic whereby somebody trusts a third party more than him/herself? What is the electronic voting facility for?<br>
<br>
Yes, I know some will say everybody should be given the right to vote the way he/she wants (paper ballot paper onsite, electronic voting or proxy). No problem with that.
<br>
<br>
But let's limit the risks by limiting the number of proxies one eligible voter can carry. There were good reasons for putting the limit.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Boubakar<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Hytham El-Nakhal <<a href="mailto:hytham@tra.gov.eg" target="_blank">hytham@tra.gov.eg</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal">"Talking as a community member in my personal capacity"<br>
<br>
+1 Mark,<br>
I support the freedom for member to choose the way to cast his vote and to remove the restriction on the total number of proxies that one member can carry (if 100 members trust one specific member so they all have equal rights to issue a proxy for him).<br>
I understand that this restriction is applied only for members who has the right to vote in the meeting as per article 12.12.viii , and not applied on non-member person who assigned as a proxy by members as per item 12.12.i & ii & vii the member is free to
choose anyone as a proxy, I'm not a lawyer but just read the articles of AFRINIC bylaws.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Haitham<br>
________________________________________<br>
From: Mark Elkins <<a href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za">mje@posix.co.za</a>><br>
Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:54 PM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
I don't think the Proxy issue would survive a legal challenge in any<br>
African country based on English (or Dutch) law.<br>
<br>
French law can be different but this is law about how a company operates<br>
and with a few minor exceptions (eg company stamps) - I'd expect this to<br>
be very similar the world over.<br>
<br>
I personally prefer freedom for the individual member to choose the way<br>
in which they want to vote, whether in person, via proxy (without<br>
restrictions) or via electronic voting.<br>
<br>
On 30/09/2016 19:13, Badru Ntege wrote:<br>
> Andrew<br>
><br>
> On 30 Sep 2016, at 5:30 pm, Andrew Alston<br>
> <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
>> No Omo,<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Please read what Ashok said – the limitation **WILL NOT SURVIVE LEGAL<br>
>> CHALLENGE**<br>
>><br>
><br>
> Afrinic is a regional organisation if we are being shackled by<br>
> jurisdiction of registration we have 52 other jurisdictions.<br>
><br>
> We have options. Let's remain very open and objective to what is best<br>
> for members.<br>
><br>
> Consensus not legal shackles is what the Internet is built on.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> The companies act does not ALLOW the limitation.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Andrew<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> *From: *Omo Oaiya <<a href="mailto:Omo.Oaiya@wacren.net">Omo.Oaiya@wacren.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Omo.Oaiya@wacren.net">Omo.Oaiya@wacren.net</a>>><br>
>> *Date: *Friday, 30 September 2016 at 17:29<br>
>> *To: *Andrew Alston <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>><br>
>> *Cc: *Jean-Robert Hountomey <<a href="mailto:jrhountomey@gmail.com">jrhountomey@gmail.com</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jrhountomey@gmail.com">jrhountomey@gmail.com</a>>>, "<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a>>" <<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a>>><br>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> As you have repeated but that is by the way. What is clear is that<br>
>> electronic voting has solved the issue with proxies so we don’t need<br>
>> them. If the companies act is restrictive and does not support better<br>
>> accountability, proxies can be limited to one per member to balance<br>
>> things out.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 30 Sep 2016, at 15:22, Andrew Alston<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com">Andrew.Alston@liquidtelecom.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Jean-Robert because proxies are enshrined in the companies act and<br>
>> the act explicitly states that they cannot be removed irrespective<br>
>> of what a company’s bylaws / constitution says.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> See fifth schedule section 6<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Andrew<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> *From: *Jean-Robert Hountomey <<a href="mailto:jrhountomey@gmail.com">jrhountomey@gmail.com</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jrhountomey@gmail.com">jrhountomey@gmail.com</a>>><br>
>> *Date: *Friday, 30 September 2016 at 17:22<br>
>> *To: *"<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a>>"<br>
>> <<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:community-discuss@afrinic.net">community-discuss@afrinic.net</a>>><br>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Talking about Board Members election (1) and (2), why do we want to keep Proxies While we have Electronic voting ?<br>
>><br>
>> Proxies make sens when a member cannot attend the meeting in person, isn't what we wanted to solve with electronic voting?<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> (1) <a href="http://afrinic.net/en/community/elections/bod-election/process" target="_blank">
http://afrinic.net/en/community/elections/bod-election/process</a><br>
>><br>
>> (2) <a href="http://afrinic.net/en/about/agmm/participate-vote" target="_blank">
http://afrinic.net/en/about/agmm/participate-vote</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On 9/29/16 8:56 PM, Alan Barrett wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On 30 Sep 2016, at 02:26, Mark Elkins <<a href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za">mje@posix.co.za</a>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za">mje@posix.co.za</a>> wrote<br>
>><br>
>> The only time the Proxy Restrictions are enforced is for the Board<br>
>><br>
>> elections. Traditionally, the elections for the PDP Co-Chair is hands at<br>
>><br>
>> the meeting and the elections for the ASO-AC is by secret ballot by<br>
>><br>
>> those present.<br>
>><br>
>> Proxy restrictions apply to elections by the Members (Resource Members and Registered Members). ASO-AC and PDWG elections are by the community or by the PDWG, not by the Members. Board elections and now Governance Committee elections are by the
Members.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Alan Barrett<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>><br>
>> Community-Discuss mailing list<br>
>><br>
>> <a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Community-Discuss mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> —<br>
>><br>
>> Omo Oaiya<br>
>> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN<br>
>> Mobile: +234 806 4522778, +221 784 305 224<br>
>> Skype: kodion<br>
>> <a href="http://www.wacren.net" target="_blank">http://www.wacren.net</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Community-Discuss mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a>><br>
>> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" target="_blank">
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Community-Discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" target="_blank">
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a><br>
><br>
<br>
--<br>
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa<br>
<a href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za">mje@posix.co.za</a> Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496<br>
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: <a href="https://ftth.posix.co.za" target="_blank">
https://ftth.posix.co.za</a><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Community-Discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>