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

[members-discuss] [rpd] Privacy breach of nomcom2015's Mailing List

Ismail M. Settenda ismail at
Tue Jun 9 07:00:49 UTC 2015

@Andrew, in adding to Seun's comments I agree with your observations
..however I am thinking that though an idea is valid and right lets not
force the issue if understanding has not been achieved especially if as you
say it is for the community.... and as Seun has pointed out there is some
progress (not as fast as it should be but some progress nevertheless).

I am wondering if you could do something different this time round to get
the on-line discussions improving by initiating some program whose goal is
to enable people participate more before we get to the AGMM but by first
identifying and understanding the reasons why they are quiet. , cause
people keep silent for various reasons: some don't want to add more to the
noise, some don't know it is their mandate to say something, some don't
believe it the right forum for change....e.t.c....e.t.c

This way between now and the next AGMM you have some pointers for you to
analyze on why on-line participation is low and then model some mechanisms
to correct this. These the board could then take into consideration and
catalyze and steer the discussion at the AGMM to a more representative and
unified conclusion.

I believe the best time we have for this organization and to pay attention
to the issues is when we are away from home and away from our daily lives
so lets maximize on that but we should not then make it the only time we
are willing to spare for the organization that provides us resources that
are critical to our businesses.



On 9 June 2015 at 08:26, Seun Ojedeji <seun.ojedeji at> wrote:

> I agree with you Andrew; discussions should not wait till face 2 face and
> we should discuss them as much as possible on the list.
> I think that is happening and improving as far as policy is concerned.
> Resolution discussion on the other hand is not something that people are
> used to discussing on the list (especially on members list) as they don't
> come often.
> That said, I think substantive discussion on the various list will
> continue to improve as the organisation leadership continue to act
> transparently and communicate with the community on status of things. The
> more we get clear view of things, the more likely that our content will be
> based more on substance and facts.
> Regards
> sent from Google nexus 4
> kindly excuse brevity and typos.
> On 9 Jun 2015 05:54, "Andrew Alston" <Andrew.Alston at>
> wrote:
>>   Hi All,
>>  While I have largely chosen to stay silent in this debate, because I
>> believe many of these issues were already resolved at the AGMM, there is
>> one thing I would like to comment on.
>>  *This has become quite normal. Somebody at the floor of the AGM called
>> the entire Afrinic community "a community of mutings" or something like it.
>> And he did it full of arrogance and sense of importance.*
>> Let me take a second to clarify what I actually said here.
>>  Far to often when something is brought to the floor of a meeting,
>> people want to either complain that it hasn’t been discussed first or that
>> they have never seen it.  The reality is, most issues that land on the
>> floor of either the PDP or the AGMM have in some form or another been on
>> these lists.  The comment made here was in reference to the special
>> resolutions that I put on the floor, and the people on the floor who stated
>> that the community had not discussed them or provided input to them.  This
>> was inaccurate, since the special resolutions had been placed on the
>> members list on the 20th of May 2015, and the community had chosen not to
>> respond to them or discuss them.  I referred to that as “mute mode”, and
>> never said “a community of mutings”.
>>  If we choose to stay silent on the lists and only respond when things
>> eventually hit the floor of the meeting room, I argue that we have done the
>> community a huge disservice and we should castigate ourselves for that,
>> rather than complaining we had no chance to comment.  Why do I say this?
>> Because the reality is that on the floor we have fairly low representation,
>> and in fact in terms of members, less than 10% of members were represented
>> on the members side of the room in the AGMM.  By choosing to only discuss
>> and debate (and indeed object) to things only in the room, we
>> disenfranchise the rest of the member base, and deny them our opinions and
>> their chance to agree or rebut.
>>  This is not the first time this issue has come up either.  As I pointed
>> out then, it took an incredibly controversial policy going to the floor
>> of the PDP in Tanzania to really engender debate, and in the weeks prior to
>> that policy going to the floor, the community had almost nothing to say on
>> the mailing lists, yet when it came to the floor, there was a longer queue
>> at the microphone than anything I have ever seen before or since.
>>  We need to decide, is the only time we have for this organisation and
>> to pay attention to the issues when we are away from home and away from our
>> daily lives?  Is that the only time we are willing to spare for the
>> organisation that provides us resources that are critical to our
>> businesses?  I would hope we are more dedicated than that.
>>  Thanks
>>  Andrew
>> _______________________________________________
>> rpd mailing list
>> rpd at
> _______________________________________________
> rpd mailing list
> rpd at
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list