<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font face="Tahoma">That is simple. I like simple.<br>
<br>
A topic worth discussing.<br>
<br>
Mark.<br>
</font><br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/Jun/19 16:58, Owen DeLong wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:B59A1AAE-7B95-4A5D-BBB8-09E2D8C9B6B6@delong.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
Personally, I think that we should simply eliminate the geographic
restrictions on board seats and have a single AfriNIC board
elected from qualified candidates from within the region,
regardless of where in the region they come from.
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Owen</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<div><br class="">
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Jun 16, 2019, at 4:39 AM, Dewole Ajao <<a
href="mailto:dewole@forum.org.ng" class=""
moz-do-not-send="true">dewole@forum.org.ng</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" class="">
<p class="">Since we are on the topic of "reforming"
NomCom, I wonder why our bylaws state that candidates
for appointment to NomCom shall *not* be domiciled in
a region where an open seat is being contested. I
think a person resident within a region is more likely
to know and have access to suitably qualified
candidates and we should remove this restriction as we
try to improve the nomination. <br class="">
</p>
<p class="">If the sole intention of this restriction
was to prevent favoritism/bias, I think adding
transparency to the process will quite easily expose
such. Or is anyone aware of other justifications for
having that restriction in place?<br class="">
</p>
<p class="">Dewole.<br class="">
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 6/16/2019 11:54 AM, John
Walu wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAHt2V=-mbzsQsRJ2coyQvGJuAGt-Y5UNDPnUH+XBXWuzG2Or_Q@mail.gmail.com"
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 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 class=""><br class="">
</div>
<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 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" moz-do-not-send="true">Community-Discuss@afrinic.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>