Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[AfriNIC-rpd] NomCom at AFRINIC-16

gift gift at
Sun May 20 14:18:44 UTC 2012

  Hi Doug and all

 From these interesting discussions I can see that I missed a lot and 
probably reduced my prospects for election. :'( :-) But that is for 
another day. I would like to share my thoughts on the issues raised by 
several others:

1. The election of PDP Chair seems a simple matter but often turns out 
complicated, high expectations yet few takers or is it few qualified! I 
tend to think that for historical reasons nominations for this position 
must close during the election meeting, say a day before the election 
day. Nomcom will be announcing the candidates as and when they are 
received and cleared as valid nominations. This will give a window to 
participants at the meeting for further discussion and to allow any more 
candidates to come up. The candidates who are nominated early should not 
be prejudiced in any way as in fact they will have benefited from a 
longer exposure to the electorate. Those that come up late may be  be 
disadvantaged(are they?) but its their choice. In the end everything 
should equalize as that will be the rule of the game. I am sure this 
will allow a suitable candidate to emerge most all the time. It seems to 
me that the candidate comment board and period is not taken seriously by 
most in the community with the actual vote and candidate presentations 
taking more prominence.

2. Regarding the lobbying for for votes, the very essence of election 
implies lobbying for votes. I was a candidate in the recent election and 
apart from being limited to one proxy I am not ware of any other 
limitations. If I phoned or emailed a member in the community 
(irrespective of how I obtained the contact details) to give them my 
profile (even my video tape) and ask for them to vote for me would I 
have broken any community rule? Who would prove how I obtained the 
contact details as there are surely many ways of doing this? What is the 
problem? The way the contact details were obtained, the medium of 
communication, the campaign message etc? What methods of campaigning for 
votes are allowed. Is it not fair to assume that most of the information 
on the AfriNIC website is public unless otherwise protected or stated. 
How are members supposed to communicate for peering and otherwise? As 
the organization and its profile grows, there will definitely be more 
interest and stiffer contest for positions. I think we need to come up 
with a code of conduct for electioneering which clearly shows unethical 
conduct and why it is so. What is coming up in the absence of clear 
rules can easily be dismissed as innuendos, suspicions and even jealous.

3. It would seem to me that the community loves the mailing list and 
finds it more user friendly to communicate, share and drive any change 
process. Most likely because it is user friendly and interactive. May be 
at each election we should have an election mailing list (not to abuse 
rpd mailing list) where candidates can post their manifestos, can be 
asked questions and members can debate. They can even do audio and video 
recordings and provide links for those who want to access them since 
technology allows us this pleasure.

4. The current restriction on proxies does not make sense to me as for 
some strange reason it downgrades a candidate to a lesser voter who can 
not carry more than one proxy when a non candidate voter has no limits, 
for the simple reason that he can out do his competitor even without 
fraud or infringement! It also limits the freedom of association on the 
part of the member appointing the proxy. Valid proxies can only be 
obtained/issued willingly and how can they be harmful to an election. 
The idea that when e-voting kicks in then proxies must stop is 
unworkable as voting by proxy goes hand in hand with physical votes on 
election day.

5. One option is to have postal votes in place of voting by proxy where 
paper ballots are completed and transmitted electronically by any member 
who wants to exercise their vote but can not attend election meeting. 
This will require adequate controls attached to the voting member's 
identity, registration number, signature etc. Obviously such votes would 
need to be received a day before the election. This may appear to be 
redundant in view of e-vote but the wider the choices the better for 
democracy. No need to disenfranchise any body.

6. For the board election which is a paper vote is it not possible to 
adopt of a ballot which indicates in front of each candidate two options 
or choices for election as either primary or associate. How accurate is 
the assumption that he who gets more votes under the current open system 
is in fact the best or intended candidate for the role. This way I think 
the vote becomes both quantitative and qualitative.



On 18/05/2012 08:13 PM, Douglas Onyango wrote:
> Alan, et al,
> On 18 May 2012 17:58, Alan Barrett<apb at>  wrote:
>> It's unfortunate that
>> the accused persons were not given an opportunity to address the allegations
>> during the meeting.
> It is my believe that the AfriNIC (community and Ltd) are community
> centred organizations, and as such, the views and sentiments of this
> constituent should at all times be respected.
> I think it wasn't in order for the chair to try and put this matter to
> rest quickly. I hope that in the future this aspect will be properly
> articulated to the chair as their mandate is being handed down.
> Regards,

Gift Shava
Financial Controller

Information Technology Integrators

Office: +26739334779, Mobile: +26772115870
Fax: +2673170457

More information about the RPD mailing list