<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jun 16, 2019, at 4:09 AM, Mark Elkins <<a href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za" class="">mje@posix.co.za</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class="">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""><p class="">Don't remember issues with NomCom when I was involved, not these
types of problems at least. Perhaps its time to not worry about
which regions volunteers come from any more.<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2019/06/16 12:54, John Walu wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAHt2V=-mbzsQsRJ2coyQvGJuAGt-Y5UNDPnUH+XBXWuzG2Or_Q@mail.gmail.com" class="">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:31 PM Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">owen@delong.com</a>>
wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<div class="">>>></div>
In general, I agree with you. I will, however, note that it is
possible that there are situations where “why” should be
redacted to protect the confidentiality and dignity of the
applicant who was rejected. For example, if the nominating
committee had rejected a candidate because he is under
indictment and under disciplinary review in his day job for
misconduct, I don’t think that nomcom should be the ones to
publicly disclose those details.<span class="gmail-im" style="color:rgb(80,0,80)"><br class="">
</span>
<div class="">>>></div>
<div class="">@Owen <br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Its true, we must protect the applicant's privacy.
However, we must also enhance the Nomcom's transparency.
Imagine a situation where Nomcomm disqualifies candidates
because they allegedly did not respond to some email. It is
quite difficult really to really prove beyond reasonable it
at all such an email was ever sent. It is even harder to
prove that it was successfully delivered to the intended
recipient.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">In such a case, Nomcom should publicly say Candidate X
was disqualified because they did not respond to an email.
(that in itself will discourage and expose a Nomcom that is
heavily biased towards knocking out, rather than recruiting
board members;-)</div>
<div class=""><br class=""></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I think that instead, the nomcom should publish “Candidate X was disqualified because the committee did not receive a timely response to an email sent from our official address to the candidate’s registered address on X date at X time.”</div><div><br class=""></div><div>In this way, the nomcom is not disclosing any details about the Candidate, but merely making statements about the content of their email box and email that they have sent. Also, it doesn’t contain an accusation that the candidate failed to respond, but merely notes that the nomcom did not receive any response.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""><blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAHt2V=-mbzsQsRJ2coyQvGJuAGt-Y5UNDPnUH+XBXWuzG2Or_Q@mail.gmail.com" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="">
</div>
<div class="">Perhaps a middle ground that would protect the
candidate's privacy while enhancing Nomcom Transparency and
accountability would be to seek consent or objection from
Candidates - at the point of application - if they would
object to the reasons behind their rejection being publicly
reported.</div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I certainly have no problem with the nomcom acting in this way, but I think as long as good judgment is used to avoid statements of a derogatory, accusatory, or incendiary nature towards or about the candidate(s), the rest should be fine.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>For candidates for which the nomcom is unable to disclose a detailed reason, suitable euphemisms can be found:</div><div><br class=""></div><div>"Candidate was disqualified due to confidential reasons.”</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Then it’s up to the candidate whether or not to disclose the reasons and appeal or accept the disqualification.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>There needs to be an appeal process for disqualifications by the nominating committee, IMHO.</div><div><br class=""></div><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""><blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAHt2V=-mbzsQsRJ2coyQvGJuAGt-Y5UNDPnUH+XBXWuzG2Or_Q@mail.gmail.com" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">That way we avoid giving a blank cheque to Nomcom who may
make decisions knowing very well that they need NOT explain
themselves to anyone (lack of accountability). </div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">So lets design and give Nomcomm a Standard Reporting
Template to enhance their transparency. They will remain
independent and autonomous in the functionality, but they
should owe the community an understanding on how they worked
hard to raise good candidates for AfriNIC. </div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>I think that’s a good idea.</div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class=""><blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAHt2V=-mbzsQsRJ2coyQvGJuAGt-Y5UNDPnUH+XBXWuzG2Or_Q@mail.gmail.com" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">The report from Nomcomm with respect to the PDWG election
is a good start and can be refined and adapted for future
Nomcomms.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">walu.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:31
PM Owen DeLong <<a href="mailto:owen@delong.com" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">owen@delong.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br class="">
<br class="">
> On Jun 4, 2019, at 11:34 PM, John Walu <<a href="mailto:walu.john@gmail.com" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true" class="">walu.john@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br class="">
> <br class="">
> 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.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> Two possible answers:<br class="">
> 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.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> OR<br class="">
> 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.<br class="">
> <br class="">
> To drill down to the correct answer, I think the Nomcom
process needs to be reformed. <br class="">
> <br class="">
> 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?<br class="">
> <br class="">
> 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 ;-)<br class="">
> <br class="">
> 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. <br class="">
<br class="">
In general, I agree with you. I will, however, note that it
is possible that there are situations where “why” should be
redacted to protect the confidentiality and dignity of the
applicant who was rejected. For example, if the nominating
committee had rejected a candidate because he is under
indictment and under disciplinary review in his day job for
misconduct, I don’t think that nomcom should be the ones to
publicly disclose those details.<br class="">
<br class="">
> 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.<br class="">
<br class="">
My suspicion is that to some degree, both are occurring.<br class="">
<br class="">
Owen<br class="">
<br class="">
<br class="">
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:mje@posix.co.za">mje@posix.co.za</a> Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496
For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://ftth.posix.co.za/">https://ftth.posix.co.za</a>
</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Community-Discuss mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Community-Discuss@afrinic.net" class="">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a><br class="">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>