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

[rpd] Board Composition

Badru Ntege badru.ntege at
Wed May 11 13:06:47 UTC 2016


On 10 May 2016, at 6:53 am, Christian Ahiauzu <christian.ahiauzu at<mailto:christian.ahiauzu at>> wrote:

My big issue is that if "two" from one organisation is not checked, how will "four" from one organisation be checked. Hope we don't get there before realising what situation we find ourselves.

 As organisations globalise that is a possibility that I suppose needs to be addressed. We do have a number of organisations spanning the region.  And it's true we say that members are on board as individuals but it's only normal for a grouping to follow a particular shared agenda especially if that agenda pays the rent.

Waiting to see the collective way forward.


On May 3, 2016 4:41 PM, "Owen DeLong" <owen at<mailto:owen at>> wrote:
It has come to my attention that Mike Silber is running for the independent seat that is opening on the AfriNIC board in the next election.

While I consider Mike to be an excellent candidate and believe he would be a true asset to the AfriNIC board, I have a concern that I must express. This concern has nothing to do with Mike himself, but rather is a concern about organizational structure.

There are only 8 elected members of the AfriNIC board. If Mike Silber is elected, then 25% of the elected board seats would be held by employees of Liquid Telecom. Personally, I do not feel that the board can properly represent the diversity of the AfriNIC community if we allow multiple board seats to be held by representatives from the same organization. While I do not believe that Liquid has any sort of goal of organizational capture or any nefarious intent whatsoever, the reality is that if this is allowed, then it does create the possibility for some other organization to achieve a form of organizational capture.

The board has tremendous authority and responsibility within the AfriNIC organization. As such, I think it is important to consider these generic structural issues seriously, no matter how much we may like and admire the candidates in question.

Again, this is not personal. If it were, I’d be endorsing Mike rather than calling his candidacy into question.

RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at>
RPD mailing list
RPD at<mailto:RPD at>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list