[rpd] AFRINIC ELECTIONS

Thu May 5 00:34:49 UTC 2016

I personally did NOT any new convincing argument compare to your previous
mail. Therefore, I will not comment on it. I prefer to give opportunity to
other members of the community to come up with new idea and argument to
move the discussion forward.

Really appreciate this open discussion.
On 5 May 2016 2:26 am, "Owen DeLong" <owen at delong.com> wrote:

>
> On May 3, 2016, at 23:02 , Bope Domilongo Christian <
> christianbope at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4 May 2016 at 13:06, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On May 3, 2016, at 17:57 , Bope Domilongo Christian <
>> christianbope at gmail.com> 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.
>
>
> Really? In what way does it matter? What negative impact could it possibly
> have? What difference is made by waiting or not other than perhaps some
> minor perceptual issues and the unnecessary stirring of the pot over those
> minor perceptual issues?
>
> I see this entire debate (over Andrew’s timing) as much ado about nothing.
> If you have a different opinion, please describe some consequences (other
> than the creation of this unnecessary debate) that could or have occurred.
>
> 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.
>
>
> I don’t think it matters. What matters is that there’s no evidence Andrew
> used privileged information and no need for him to have done so in order to
> post what he did. It’s widely known and pretty clear that this is the case.
> Any community members that don’t know Andrew didn’t commit malfeasance in
> his posting at first surely know by now (at least any who care).
>
> 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)
>
>
> OK, but even with that information, Andrew didn’t need that in order to
> make his post.
>
> 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.
>
>
> I’m sorry, but I wasn’t aware that someone stopped being a member of the
> community when they joined the board. I was unaware of the section in the
> bylaws that strips one of their rights and responsibilities as a member of
> the community upon admission to the board. Could you please point me to
> that section? I haven’t been able to find it in my search while writing
> this.
>
> It doesn’t exist? Oh, then what is the basis for this supposed clear
> differentiation you propose? It seems that you are suggesting this
> differentiation prevent a member of the board from acting as a member of
> the community. (Since there’s nothing to suggest a member of the community
> has attempted to act as a member of the board).
>
> 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.
>
>
> Sorry, you said something about a main question, but I didn’t see a
> question in there.
>
> I see no reason a person who expects to be a candidate should wait to
> start their campaign. Further, that’s not what happened here anyway. The
> candidate didn’t start the campaign. Andrew is not the candidate. Andrew
> started 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.
>
>
> I’m not at all frustrated by your mail. I think the word you’re looking
> for is bored. I fail to see the point in continuing to harp on an issue
> which you, yourself have admitted is irrelevant.
>
> You didn’t ask any questions, really. You made a lot of accusations.
> Claiming that an accusation is a basic or principled question doesn’t make
> it so.
>
>
>
>> 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.
>
>
> I think that’s true. Do you think I was claiming otherwise? I was not. I
> consider Adiel a long-time friend. My intent here was not to cast stones at
> the past, but to point out that while we are giving appreciation and
> respect, we should include the present as well as the past.
>
> Owen
>
>
> My 2 cents
>
>
>>
>> Owen
>>
>> On 4 May 2016 5:41 am, "serge ilunga" <sergekbk at gmail.com> 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 liquidtelecom.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jean-Robert,
>>>>
>>>> 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*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>> From: Hountomey Jean Robert <jrhountomey at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 9:56 PM
>>>> To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
>>>> Cc: Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>, abel ELITCHA <
>>>> kmw.elitcha at gmail.com>, "AfriNIC RPD MList." <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>> 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.
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> Regards.
>>>> Jean-Robert
>>>>
>>>> 2016-05-03 13:08 GMT-05:00 Andrew Alston <
>>>> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> 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*
>>>>> *directly)*
>>>>>
>>>>> So, pray tell, what privileged information Badru?
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Badru Ntege <badru.ntege at nftconsult.com>
>>>>> Date: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 9:04 PM
>>>>> To: Andrew Alston <Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>, abel ELITCHA <
>>>>> kmw.elitcha at gmail.com>, "AfriNIC RPD MList." <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>> Subject: RE: [rpd] AFRINIC ELECTIONS
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>>
>>>>> regards
>>>>>
>>>>> bn
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>> *From:* Andrew Alston [Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com]
>>>>> *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.
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: abel ELITCHA <kmw.elitcha at gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: Tuesday, 3 May 2016 at 8:33 PM
>>>>> To: "AfriNIC RPD MList." <rpd at afrinic.net>
>>>>> Subject: [rpd] AFRINIC ELECTIONS
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>> 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 (
>>>>> http://www.afrinic.net/en/community/elections/bod-election/process),
>>>>> 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
>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrew "
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> RPD mailing list
>>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Serge ILUNGA KABWIKA*
>>> *Skype: sergekbk*
>>> *Cell: +243814443160 <%2B243814443160>*
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> RPD mailing list
>>> RPD at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>> RPD mailing list
>> RPD at afrinic.net
>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20160505/1544ab0d/attachment-0001.html>