At no point did I say that Randy Bush had not made contributions, nor does
not continue to do so in other ways.
I did however say that he was a negative person and had a sour demeanour
and had an arrogance towards the community. This doesn't mean he hasn't
contributed - he just does it in a very unpleasant way.
And anyone who thinks the mechanism in which Randy engages this community
is acceptable, clearly has no respect for the community or those who give
their time to it. Supporting an abusive, sarcastic and disrespectful means
of engagement is saying it is acceptable, and it is not. Ever.
once again, all ad homina, no actual discussion of issues.
but i'll leave the ad homina to experts such as you and owen and try to
get back to issues. someone too shy to post here suggested i shill for
them. i think their points are worth it. reasonable public resource
governance practice would include at least the following:
- term limits for board and committee positions (maybe 2-4 years?)
- ten year employment caps on executive staff
- members decide bylaws and budgets
and as i suggested to arin, a gov/ops review consultation consisting of
folk with some stature in these areas, and not having any members from
board or staff.
and again, i am not speaking just to apnic, but all rirs.
randy
