Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Questions for Alain...
Saul Stein
saul at enetworks.co.za
Wed Jun 6 06:15:36 UTC 2018
I have been waiting for Alain to respond, but sadly he hasn’t.
He has written and with a few colleagues, tried to bulldoze through a
proposal and suggested another, ignoring all protests and objections while
lambasting all and anyone who stood in his way . A policy that over the past
number of years has cause and fractured this community immeasurably!
There is a clear conflict of interest here.
I therefor call for Alain to withdraw both his soft landing policy within
24hours. Should that not happen, I call on the chairs of this group, to use
powers of common sense to reject this policy as a conflict of interest.
I also call for Alains other proposal to be withdrawn, as it is clear that
this is designed to obscure conflicts of interest.
Mike, sadly the motivation here is the issue. In my view there is no
credibility in anyone that berates and divides an organisation for
self-interest as we have seen here. The proof is the website and LinkedIn,
with no denial from Alain who if this wasn’t true has now had time to
investigate.
From: Mike Burns [mailto:mike at iptrading.com]
Sent: 06 June 2018 02:05 AM
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: AfriNIC RPD MList. <rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Questions for Alain...
Hi Owen,
Simply, no. His motivation doesn't change the credibility of his arguments.
They stand on their own.
There is no place and no need for this, especially with the subject line,
how could it not be ad hominem?
Attacking the motivation of a person is almost the definition of argumentum
ad hominem.
Regards,
Mike
---- On Tue, 05 Jun 2018 19:40:12 -0400 Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com
<mailto:owen at delong.com> > wrote ----
While I agree ad hominem has no place in policy debates, I think there is
validity in this case to attacking the credibility of his arguments based on
what is now a visible previously undisclosed conflict of interest. If he had
merely proposed or advocated for the policy, it would be one thing, but his
intransigent refusal to withdraw the policy despite repeated rejection by
the community establishes a pattern of facts which invites scrutiny of his
motivations and the credibility of his arguments in light of recent
disclosures.
Owen
On Jun 5, 2018, at 08:03 , Mike Burns <mike at iptrading.com
<mailto:mike at iptrading.com> > wrote:
Hi Andrew,
While I sympathize with your position on the soft landing proposals, and
even accepting all the facts below are true, the fact remains that you were
attacking the man (ad hominem) by impugning his motivations, not his
arguments.
Regards,
Mike
From: Andrew Alston [ <mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com>
mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 10:37 AM
To: Mike Burns < <mailto:mike at iptrading.com> mike at iptrading.com>; 'Owen
DeLong' < <mailto:owen at delong.com> owen at delong.com>; 'Chevalier du Borg' <
<mailto:virtual.borg at gmail.com> virtual.borg at gmail.com>
Cc: 'AfriNIC RPD MList.' < <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net> rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: RE: [rpd] Questions for Alain...
Mike,
Nothing ad-hominem about this –
Fact – a policy was proposed that the community rejected
Fact – the community asked for the policy to be withdrawn – multiple times
Fact – Alain refused to withdraw and then denied that the community had
demanded such – despite it being on video
Fact – The policy was some how shoved through – and appealed
Fact – the appeal was granted
Fact – Alain then slammed the integrity of the appeal committee and accused
them of malfeasance – again – that’s on video
All of this – over a 3 period while railing against people who wanted IP
space and doing everything in his power to ensure that people could not GET
the space they needed by policy – while also holding a block of space for
his employer that remains unannounced other than 25% of it announced by a
commercial ASN – while pushing for an audit policy that anyone can clearly
see was designed to target specific individuals – and I can name them.
To then turn around and open a broker – while attempting to use policy to
swing things like this with no declaration of interest – might be within the
rules – but it is in my opinion – shockingly bad ethics and at the very
least – shows a total lack of judgement
Andrew
From: Mike Burns [ <mailto:mike at iptrading.com> mailto:mike at iptrading.com]
Sent: 05 June 2018 17:11
To: 'Owen DeLong' < <mailto:owen at delong.com> owen at delong.com>; 'Chevalier du
Borg' < <mailto:virtual.borg at gmail.com> virtual.borg at gmail.com>
Cc: 'AfriNIC RPD MList.' < <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net> rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Questions for Alain...
“There’s nothing wrong with being a broker” – Owen
Thanks for that, Owen. 😉
More to the point, there is nothing wrong with a broker authoring policy.
I agree that it’s better to be open about being a broker when authoring
policy.
However this thread began entirely as an ad hominem.
+1 to the previous poster who said it’s past time for Africa to get in sync
with the rest of the world regarding the IPv4 market.
From: Owen DeLong [ <mailto:owen at delong.com> mailto:owen at delong.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2018 9:14 AM
To: Chevalier du Borg < <mailto:virtual.borg at gmail.com>
virtual.borg at gmail.com>
Cc: AfriNIC RPD MList. < <mailto:rpd at afrinic.net> rpd at afrinic.net>
Subject: Re: [rpd] Questions for Alain...
There’s nothing wrong with being a broker. However, the SL-BIS proposal is
one which brokers stand to profit from.
Your analogy of the doctor doesn’t apply because the doctor isn’t profiting
from it when you stop smoking. Indeed, you’re improved health might actually
cost him money.
This would be more like having the doctor encourage your smoking and then
discovering that he also owned a tobacco company.
Not only is it bad medical advice, but turns out the doctor stands to profit
from it if the community takes his bad advice.
Owen
On Jun 5, 2018, at 04:19, Chevalier du Borg <
<mailto:virtual.borg at gmail.com> virtual.borg at gmail.com> wrote:
Dear M. Alson
Is there a logic arguement in here somewhere?
Ad-hominem is not logic
After all, yourself have defended broker on this list saying there nothing
wrong with it.
The doctor advise to STOP smoking is still good advice for you, even if
doctor hisself is a big smoker.
Le mar. 5 juin 2018 à 14:31, Andrew Alston <
<mailto:Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> Andrew.Alston at liquidtelecom.com> a
écrit :
You have actively supported and fought for the new soft landing policy – to
artificially restrict space to entities that need it.
Now, I’d like to ask – as an author of the soft-landing-bis policy which you
have STILL not withdrawn… aren’t you just a LITTLE bit conflicted in trying
to create an artificial shortage and make it hard for people to get space –
while starting and founding an IP broker in Africa?
Maybe now we understand the *true* motivations behind the soft landing bis
policy….
<http://ext-host.trstech.net/ipregistrar/trust_us.html>
http://ext-host.trstech.net/ipregistrar/trust_us.html
Andrew
_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net> RPD at afrinic.net
<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
--
Borg le Chevalier
___________________________________
"Common sense is what tells us the world is flat"
_______________________________________________
RPD mailing list
<mailto:RPD at afrinic.net> RPD at afrinic.net
<https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd>
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/rpd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20180606/87d4d3a7/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the RPD
mailing list