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


Promise Kumalo kumalop at
Wed May 4 06:25:05 UTC 2016

Hi Bope


Please can you send through a link to the bylaws. Im failing to locate them J. 





From: Bope Domilongo Christian [mailto:christianbope at] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 4, 2016 8:02 AM
To: Owen DeLong <owen at>
Cc: rpd <rpd at>
Subject: Re: [rpd] AFRINIC ELECTIONS




On 4 May 2016 at 13:06, Owen DeLong <owen at <mailto:owen at> > wrote:


On May 3, 2016, at 17:57 , Bope Domilongo Christian <christianbope at <mailto:christianbope at> > wrote:


Speaking on my own capacity,
I also think it is proper for Board member to let the Nomcom officially release the slate of the candidate before campaigning for XYZ candidates. 


Would it have had better optics if Andrew waited, yes. Does it matter? Not really…


I'm partially agreed with you Owen. I think waiting would the best option. Since there is a debate about that it matter.  

As a Board the community might think that Board is using is privileged of accessing to confidential information and used for is personal interest (hiding behing speaking on my own personal capacity). 


This is patently absurd. Not because Andrew made it clear he was speaking in his own capacity and not as a member of the board, but because no privileged information was needed or used in his communication. Did you really think that Mike would consider a nomination or submit the necessary information to be nominated if he didn’t first discuss his intentions with Andrew? I can’t imagine that would be the case.


I do not have any doubt of Andrew talking with Mike. Do you think all the community are aware that Andrew and Mike might talk before or both might work from Liquid Telecom? For those who knew that is fine. What I'm sure of all the community members know that Andrew is a AfriNIC Board.  


At least in theory, the board should not have privileged access to the nom-com process.


The Board does not have any involvement in NOmcom process. However the Board approved the slate of candidate propose by the Nomcom in terms of Bylaws section 12.14(i) 


Therefore, any community thought in this direction makes no more sense than a community thought that Alain Aina is planning to use AfriNIC funds to sponsor a manned trip to Mars next week. (Just to be clear, I have no privileged information, but to the best of my knowledge, he has no such intent).


Thank you for information. I personally think the main problem is to clearly differentiate the line between Board and members of the community and I think we should all do our best to avoid that confusion.


Furthermore members of the community may think that some information from the NomCom have been leak if yes by who? I think the community at large deserve clarification.

Again, this is ridiculous. No nomination committee privileged information was needed, nor is it likely any was obtained, let alone leaked in this process. Andrew and Mike know each other. They work for the same organization. They probably talk on a somewhat regular basis. I’d be stunned and amazed if Mike had not first discussed his candidacy with Andrew prior to participating in any nomination process.


I personally respect your opinion.
I do not have any doubt of Andrew talking with Mike. Do you think all the community are aware that Andrew and Mike might talk before or both might work from Liquid Telecom? For those who knew that is fine. What I'm sure of all the community members know that Andrew is a AfriNIC Board. 

I think the main question we should asked is knowing that NomCOM is black box and totally independent. Using  the common sense the candidate should wait is nomination approved officially by the Nomcom before starting the campaign.  

I do not have problem of Board campaigning for others. The problem is the manner is actually done.

You’re upset because Andrew talked about a candidate before the slate was released on the basis that Andrew knows the candidate and knows of his intention to run. Fine. But really, what is the basis for your concern? Given that your reasons above are patently absurd, what else do you have?


Let not personalized the discussion to one person. Why I should? I can clearly see you seems like really frustrated about my mail which just ask some basic and principle question.


The campaign is purely and simply propaganda with full of political argument to get vote by forgetting that AfiNIC has 10 years history not 1 year.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but this statement doesn’t parse for me, so I’m not really sure what you mean by it.

AfriNIC community at Large agreed with the statement.  

Last and not the least all my appreciation and respect to all AfriNIC former Board, Chair and CEO for their outstanding work to building this organization.

Let us not forget the efforts by the current board, chair, and CEO in righting the troubled ship they inherited from the former board, chair, and CEO as well.


Humm, the organization has 10 years history and everyone are bringing is stone in the construction. I do acknowledge the work done by the current Board and the CEO including all former Board, Chair and former CEO. 

It seems to me like AfriNIC do NOT have history it started just last year.

My 2 cents




On 4 May 2016 5:41 am, "serge ilunga" <sergekbk at <mailto:sergekbk at> > wrote:

Hello Andrew,


I think that it is not a matter of objectivity.

Board members shall adhere to a code of conduct which protects organization and not expose it all the times. 

AfriNIC operates for the public Interest and it must be with Public trust.


Kind Regards.


On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at <mailto:Andrew.Alston at> > wrote:



One last question before I head to bed.


How should the community ask anyone to act in the best interests of anything, while telling them to remain neutral and silent when they believe that one course of action will strengthen the organisation and another could potentially weaken it?


And finally, to end this email with a quote:


“Why should we cherish “objectivity”, as if ideas were innocent, as if they don’t serve one interest or another? Surely, we want to be objective if that means telling the truth as we see it, not concealing information that may be embarrassing to our point of view. But we don’t want to be objective if it means pretending that ideas don’t play a part in the social struggles of our time, that we don’t take sides in those struggles.

Indeed, it is impossible to be neutral. In a world already moving in certain directions, where wealth and power are already distributed in certain ways, neutrality means accepting the way things are now. It is a world of clashing interests – war against peace, nationalism against internationalism, equality against greed, and democracy against elitism – and it seems to me both impossible and undesirable to be neutral in those conflicts.” 

*	Howard Zinn – Declarations of Independence: Cross-Examining American Ideology




From: Hountomey Jean Robert < <mailto:jrhountomey at> jrhountomey at>
Date: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 9:56 PM
To: Andrew Alston < <mailto:Andrew.Alston at> Andrew.Alston at>
Cc: Badru Ntege < <mailto:badru.ntege at> badru.ntege at>, abel ELITCHA < <mailto:kmw.elitcha at> kmw.elitcha at>, "AfriNIC RPD MList." < <mailto:rpd at> rpd at>
Subject: Re: [rpd] AFRINIC ELECTIONS


A board member endorsing a candidate like this is a concern. 

How should the community trust board members'  objectivity and commitment to put the interest of the Global public interest as a whole in front of any particular interests. 





2016-05-03 13:08 GMT-05:00 Andrew Alston < <mailto:Andrew.Alston at> Andrew.Alston at>:

Let me quote from the below email which you seem not to have read, so I will bold it, and italic it:


I state openly that I do NOT yet know the entire slate, however, due

to time limitations and knowing what I know about the candidates I

refer to below, as well as at least some of the candidates running

against them (which I have heard from those candidates running



So, pray tell, what privileged information Badru?  





From: Badru Ntege < <mailto:badru.ntege at> badru.ntege at>
Date: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 9:04 PM
To: Andrew Alston < <mailto:Andrew.Alston at> Andrew.Alston at>, abel ELITCHA < <mailto:kmw.elitcha at> kmw.elitcha at>, "AfriNIC RPD MList." < <mailto:rpd at> rpd at>




we may not see eye to eye on every other issue but as hard as it may be lets show a touch of humility and respect for the community.  As board member you have access to privileged information that one can clearly see you used wrongly here.  


Please give the community some respect and offer an apology.  NOMCOM has not yet released the slate you of all people should not be sending this out to your lists.  Unless you also know the outcome of NOMCOM.


Lets not continue to defend the indefensible.  


this is tantamount to abuse of office but then again someone will ask under which bylaw.  My answer is under the un written rule of common sense and mutual respect, and fairness for all candidates.


Admit that you errored  its only human to do so.








From: Andrew Alston [ <mailto:Andrew.Alston at> Andrew.Alston at]
Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 8:38 PM
To: abel ELITCHA; AfriNIC RPD MList.
Subject: Re: [rpd] AFRINIC ELECTIONS

Hi Abel,


Yes, I advocated for candidates.  If you notice I clearly stated, I do not know who is on the slate.  I do not have a final slate.  However, I know who the candidates are that I support.  I have every right to lobby for those candidates at any point.  Just as any candidate or any other person has the right to lobby for their candidates.


I did not send that email as a board member, I sent it as a personal individual.  I stand by what I said, and I stand by those endorsements.


As for the allegations about people being paid.  That is completely false and a libellous allegation that was investigated and found to have no merit, as resolutions published will attest to. 


I stand by every word I said in the below email, and I will not, and would not retract a single word of it.





From: abel ELITCHA < <mailto:kmw.elitcha at> kmw.elitcha at>
Date: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 8:33 PM
To: "AfriNIC RPD MList." < <mailto:rpd at> rpd at>




I got to see the mail below from a board member. It concerned me as i raised some importants points:


1- While according to the election timeline (, the NOMCOM is evaluating the candidates and has not yet announced the slates, the  board member started the campaign to 


influence the process and the vote


2- He is pushing for a candidate from his company


3- He issued an arbitrary judgment on the ability of the community to decide 


4- I recalled that it  is the same board member who admitted in 2014  that he influenced the elections by paying for people to come and vote for him. The disclosure of which caused two board members to resign for breaching NDA.




Begin forwarded message:



Hi All,


I’m going to take a bit of an unusual step for me here, as promised in

earlier emails, and I am now ready to officially endorse certain

candidates for the AfriNIC elections.


I state openly that I do NOT yet know the entire slate, however, due

to time limitations and knowing what I know about the candidates I

refer to below, as well as at least some of the candidates running

against them (which I have heard from those candidates running

directly), I feel I’m in a position to take a strong and unequivocal

stance here and am ready to state to the community at large my views

on this.


Hence, in the next AfriNIC election, there are three seats open, one

independent seat, one north african seat and one west african seat.


On the West African seat, I am endorsing Sunday Folayan.  Sunday is

the current chair of the AfriNIC board, and despite many trying

circumstances in the year and half since he has taken the chair,

AfriNIC has made tremendous progress.  Indeed, in Pointe Noir we were

credited with giving the community transparent information and

financials for the first time in 10 years.  Sunday and his leadership

played a huge part in this and his institutional knowledge and the way

he has run the board have been critical to the improved situation we

are starting to find ourselves in.


On the North African seat, I am endorsing Hytham Ek-Nakhal.  Hytham is

currently the deputy chair of the board, and again, in the year since

he took that position, he has proved very capable and also carries

deep institutional knowledge from a prolonged tenure on the board.  I

have found him to be fair, reasonable and willing to both have his

views and debate the views of others in the search for a consensus

approach.  Hence, I strongly believe that his tenure on the board

should continue.


On the Independent seat, here I am endorsing Mike Silber, who many of

you know.  I do not know if the current board member for this seat is

going to be running again, but irrespective of that my endorsement

will stand, due to specific skills I believe the AfriNIC board

requires.  Mike has many many years in the industry, and his work with

ICANN and within the addressing space is well documented and well

respected.  In addition to that, Mike is legally trained and that is

something we desperately need within AfriNIC as we look at the bylaws,

as we move into an era where there is a governance committee, there

are bids of control and various other issues.  It is that legal skill

set that we are missing directly on the board (yes, we have legal

council, but it is a very different thing to have someone who has that

kind of legal knowledge actually sitting on the board).


I need to also point out, in the event of the board losing both Sunday

and Hytham, and the independent seat going to a weak candidate,

AfriNIC will be in serious trouble.  Firstly, I personally do not

believe that the board has anyone who is anywhere close to as capable

as Sunday or Hytham for the positions of chair and vice chair

respectively, and whoever comes in could not take those positions no

matter how strong, since those positions require institutional

knowledge that comes from time served on the board.  My reasoning for

endorsing Mike is made plain above.


As such, for those of you who are opting to issue proxies and wish to

issue proxies to myself or via myself, this is how I will be voting.

Those of you who are voting electronically, I encourage you when the

slate comes out to study each and every candidate – but I am confident

that what I have said above will ring true, and I ask every member of

this list to get out there and use your vote, either for one of these

candidates or otherwise one of the others when the slate comes out –

but please, make sure you vote, either via proxy or via online or in

person.  I cannot stress how many critical issues are going to come up

in the next year or two, and without a strong and independent board we

could face serious issues.


Please feel free  to address any questions to me.  As stated in

previous emails, as soon as the proxy generation system is open, for

those that wish to use that route, I will supply details on how to use





Andrew "


RPD mailing list
 <mailto:RPD at> RPD at


RPD mailing list
RPD at <mailto:RPD at>



Skype: sergekbk
Cell:  <tel:%2B243814443160> +243814443160

RPD mailing list
RPD at <mailto:RPD at>

RPD mailing list
RPD at <mailto:RPD at>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 56886 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list