Keyboard Shortcuts
Thread View
j: Next unread messagek: Previous unread messagej a: Jump to all threadsj l: Jump to MailingList overview
Dear SIG members
A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.
https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt
If agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.
https://www.apnic.net/mailinglists
If successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.
To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing List before the conference.
More background to this proposal is available at:
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Regards
Adam
-------------------------------------------------------
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
-------------------------------------------------------
Proposer: Masato Yamanishi myamanis@gmail.com
1. Problem statement --------------------
1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such rule.
Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is different in each election.
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the community discussion.
2. SIG Chair's term of service While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for long time.
In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)
2. Objective of policy change -----------------------------
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting clear rule for eligible voters.
In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
3. Situation in other regions -----------------------------
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
4. Proposed policy solution ---------------------------
1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
2. SIG Chair's term of service I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
5. Advantages / Disadvantages -----------------------------
Advantages: By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
- we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG Chair election or not - we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election
By revising SIG Chair's term of service - we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice - we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed
Disadvantages: APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether each voter is registered participants.
There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
6. Impact on resource holders -----------------------------
No direct impact
7. References -------------
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
APNIC SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines
[ this is address policy? ]
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the community discussion. ... I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.
randy
Hi Randy
On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
>> [ this is address policy? ]
No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?
The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.
At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.
> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.
randy
This is worrying re Confer as I am quite sure I could register 100,000 people with unique addresses.
We've entered a new era of bots - this would not be hard.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Randy
On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
>> [ this is address policy? ]No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chairelection >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.
At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.
> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same twoyears.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the sametime.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hi Skeeve
I’m sure you wouldn’t do that, though. The Secretariat could add more stringent registration requirements into Confer, or use an off-the-shelf or online election platform. The question would always be convenience versus validity.
I internally raised the potential for somebody to game the system purely to take advantage of the new travel support for SIG Chairs and so, at APNIC 41 Paul Wilson suggested the community might want to review the procedures to make sure they are comfortable with the new situation.
Just to be clear, the Secretariat has no preference, opinion, or objective in the outcome of this discussion. So don’t take anything I say to be an endorsement of any outcome.
Adam
On 6/09/2016, 10:18, "Skeeve Stevens" <skeeve@v4now.commailto:skeeve@v4now.com> wrote:
This is worrying re Confer as I am quite sure I could register 100,000 people with unique addresses.
We've entered a new era of bots - this would not be hard.
...Skeeve
Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker v4Now - an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.commailto:skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.comhttp://www.v4now.com/
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4nowhttp://facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeevehttp://linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguyhttp://twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.comhttp://www.theispguy.com/ ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
[mage removed by sender.] IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Gosling <adam@apnic.netmailto:adam@apnic.net> wrote: Hi Randy
On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" <randy@psg.commailto:randy@psg.com> wrote:
>> [ this is address policy? ]
No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?
The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.
At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.
> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.
randy
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.netmailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
I wouldn't, but many others would. Don't wait until it's been abused before you have to clean it up.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Skeeve
I’m sure you wouldn’t do that, though. The Secretariat could add more stringent registration requirements into Confer, or use an off-the-shelf or online election platform. The question would always be convenience versus validity.
I internally raised the potential for somebody to game the system purely to take advantage of the new travel support for SIG Chairs and so, at APNIC 41 Paul Wilson suggested the community might want to review the procedures to make sure they are comfortable with the new situation.
Just to be clear, the Secretariat has no preference, opinion, or objective in the outcome of this discussion. So don’t take anything I say to be an endorsement of any outcome.
Adam
On 6/09/2016, 10:18, "Skeeve Stevens" skeeve@v4now.com wrote:
This is worrying re Confer as I am quite sure I could register 100,000 people with unique addresses.
We've entered a new era of bots - this would not be hard.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
*v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
[image: mage removed by sender.]
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Randy
On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
>> [ this is address policy? ]No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chairelection >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.
At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.
> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same twoyears.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the sametime.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hi Skeeve,
Firstly, I don't think currend proposed solution is perfect, so I'm very welcome to hear your suggestions how to fix these problems.
Certainly, just e-mail address is NOT enough for Confer registration, but how can we set a rule in SIG guideline? Require to identify himself/herself when registering?
Regards, Matt
2016-09-06 9:41 GMT+09:00 Skeeve Stevens skeeve@v4now.com:
I wouldn't, but many others would. Don't wait until it's been abused before you have to clean it up.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; http://twitter.com/networkceoaulinkedin. com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 10:38 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Skeeve
I’m sure you wouldn’t do that, though. The Secretariat could add more stringent registration requirements into Confer, or use an off-the-shelf or online election platform. The question would always be convenience versus validity.
I internally raised the potential for somebody to game the system purely to take advantage of the new travel support for SIG Chairs and so, at APNIC 41 Paul Wilson suggested the community might want to review the procedures to make sure they are comfortable with the new situation.
Just to be clear, the Secretariat has no preference, opinion, or objective in the outcome of this discussion. So don’t take anything I say to be an endorsement of any outcome.
Adam
On 6/09/2016, 10:18, "Skeeve Stevens" skeeve@v4now.com wrote:
This is worrying re Confer as I am quite sure I could register 100,000 people with unique addresses.
We've entered a new era of bots - this would not be hard.
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker*
*v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service
skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
[image: mage removed by sender.]
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Randy
On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
>> [ this is address policy? ]No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who neverattend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.
At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.
> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same twoyears.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the sametime.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
hi:
this kludge is not very well thought out.
not that i am advocating, but an ietfish approach would be a requirement to have attended n previous meetings. makes more sense to me than this proposal. but ...
personally, i am not sure there is a real problem. so what if the old guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected. it might be a breath of fresh air. what actual damage could some fresh blood do? some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the internet.
[ historical note: this descends from the first taipei meeting, where there were no voting restrictions. a bunch of folk showed up just for the ec election and voted in an outsider, shock and horror! of course, all sorts of rules and restrictions to protect the old guard were immediately put in place. ]
randy
Hi Randy
Just a couple of references - inline
On 6/09/2016, 10:35, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
hi:
this kludge is not very well thought out.
not that i am advocating, but an ietfish approach would be a requirement to have attended n previous meetings. makes more sense to me than this proposal. but ...
The NRO NC election process a similar requirement. <snip>Individuals who are on site and are registered for either the current APNIC Conference they are attending, or have been registered for at least one previous APNIC Conference since APNIC 10, are entitled to one vote.</snip> https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/nro-elections/nro-elec...
Voting in EC elections is restricted to Members. https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/ec/voting/who-can-vote
personally, i am not sure there is a real problem. so what if the old guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected. it might be a breath of fresh air. what actual damage could some fresh blood do? some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the internet.
[ historical note: this descends from the first taipei meeting, where there were no voting restrictions. a bunch of folk showed up just for the ec election and voted in an outsider, shock and horror! of course, all sorts of rules and restrictions to protect the old guard were immediately put in place. ]
randy
The NRO NC election process a similar requirement. <snip>Individuals who are on site and are registered for either the current APNIC Conference they are attending, or have been registered for at least one previous APNIC Conference since APNIC 10, are entitled to one vote.</snip>
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/nro-elections/nro-elec...
Though it is not related to this proposal...... There is a pre-req for voters but there is no pre-req for nominees... :)
Hi Adam and all ,
I think some rules should be added for voting eligibility to avoid fraud (like NRO voting eligibility).
Can you please clear up the question how to identify the individuals entitlement who are previously registered APNIC conference and eligible on site voting like APNIC 43 meeting ?
*Regards / Jahangir *
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Randy
Just a couple of references - inline
On 6/09/2016, 10:35, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
hi: this kludge is not very well thought out. not that i am advocating, but an ietfish approach would be arequirement to have attended n previous meetings. makes more sense to me than this proposal. but ...
The NRO NC election process a similar requirement. <snip>Individuals who are on site and are registered for either the current APNIC Conference they are attending, or have been registered for at least one previous APNIC Conference since APNIC 10, are entitled to one vote.</snip> https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/nro-elections/nro- election-process
Voting in EC elections is restricted to Members. https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/ec/voting/who-can- vote
personally, i am not sure there is a real problem. so what if the old guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected. it might be a breath of fresh air. what actual damage could some fresh blooddo? some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the internet.
[ historical note: this descends from the first taipei meeting, where there were no voting restrictions. a bunch of folk showed up justfor the ec election and voted in an outsider, shock and horror! of course, all sorts of rules and restrictions to protect the old guard were immediately put in place. ]
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Dear Jahangir,
Sorry, I just aware nobody has not yet answer for your question.
Can you please clear up the question how to identify the individuals
entitlement who are previously registered APNIC conference and eligible on site voting like APNIC 43 meeting ?
In on-site case, if the secretariat find a person not wearing the name tag, just simply ask whether he or she is a registered participants of current or previous APNIC conferences. Since we don't need to maintain full list of eligible voters, I believe it is enough.
Regards, Matt
2016-09-23 23:46 GMT+09:00 Jahangir Hossain jahangir@parween.net:
Hi Adam and all ,
I think some rules should be added for voting eligibility to avoid fraud (like NRO voting eligibility).
Can you please clear up the question how to identify the individuals entitlement who are previously registered APNIC conference and eligible on site voting like APNIC 43 meeting ?
*Regards / Jahangir *
On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Hi Randy
Just a couple of references - inline
On 6/09/2016, 10:35, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
hi: this kludge is not very well thought out. not that i am advocating, but an ietfish approach would be arequirement to have attended n previous meetings. makes more sense to me than this proposal. but ...
The NRO NC election process a similar requirement. <snip>Individuals who are on site and are registered for either the current APNIC Conference they are attending, or have been registered for at least one previous APNIC Conference since APNIC 10, are entitled to one vote.</snip> https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/nro- elections/nro-election-process
Voting in EC elections is restricted to Members. https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/ec/ voting/who-can-vote
personally, i am not sure there is a real problem. so what if the old guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected. it might be a breath of fresh air. what actual damage could some fresh blooddo? some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the internet.
[ historical note: this descends from the first taipei meeting, where there were no voting restrictions. a bunch of folk showed up justfor the ec election and voted in an outsider, shock and horror! of course, all sorts of rules and restrictions to protect the old guard were immediately put in place. ]
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
-- *Regards / Jahangir *
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Randy,
personally, i am not sure there is a real problem. so what if the old guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected. it might be a breath of fresh air. what actual damage could some fresh blood do? some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the internet.
If new unknown folk is a choice of the community, it is fine and I don't see any problem. However, the problem I'm trying to fix is someone can manipulate the community's view by inviting several persons who never and will not involve the community discussion after the election. (I'm always expecting new and fresh blood to Policy SIG Chair)
Regards, Matt
2016-09-06 9:35 GMT+09:00 Randy Bush randy@psg.com:
hi:
this kludge is not very well thought out.
not that i am advocating, but an ietfish approach would be a requirement to have attended n previous meetings. makes more sense to me than this proposal. but ...
personally, i am not sure there is a real problem. so what if the old guard gets thrown out and some new unknown folk get elected. it might be a breath of fresh air. what actual damage could some fresh blood do? some radical change in apnic across the board just might benefit the internet.
[ historical note: this descends from the first taipei meeting, where there were no voting restrictions. a bunch of folk showed up just for the ec election and voted in an outsider, shock and horror! of course, all sorts of rules and restrictions to protect the old guard were immediately put in place. ]
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
However, the problem I'm trying to fix is someone can manipulate the community's view
i know. apnic has been doing it for years. time to let others do it too.
randy
Randy and Adam,
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?
The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the
Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m >not sure if we would notice.
Even if the secretariat would try to check it, I'm afraid that we cannot refuse non-registered person participating the discussion and election since PDP says "Anyone may attend the meetings and participate in discussions and the decision making." and there is no criteria for eligible voters in SIG guideline.
Regards, Matt
2016-09-06 8:14 GMT+09:00 Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net:
Hi Randy
On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" randy@psg.com wrote:
>> [ this is address policy? ]No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there.
>> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chairelection >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice.
At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback.
> I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same twoyears.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the sametime.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Randy,
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.
I know that original intension of staggered term is mitigating such transition difficulties, but now we have another practice in SIG guideline as follows.
Unless new Policy SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs are required immediately, there
will be a handover period. Outgoing Chairs and Co-Chairs are expected to follow >proposals reaching consensus at the current OPM, to the completion of the Policy Development Process.
In addition, other SIGs, NIR and Co-Operation SIG, are having Chair and Co-Chair elections simultaneously at least past 4-5 years (maybe more). Since SIG guideline is applied to these SIGs as well, a gap exist in there and I would like to fix it.
Regards, Matt
2016-09-05 19:52 GMT+09:00 Randy Bush randy@psg.com:
[ this is address policy? ]
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the community discussion. ... I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold?
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time.
I know that original intension of staggered term is mitigating such transition difficulties, but now we have another practice in SIG guideline as follows.
and this mistake should make me feel good about adding more mistakes?
randy
I think this does need fixing, but I am not happy with this proposal as do not think it goes far enough.
Specifically - who is entitled to register for Confer?
...Skeeve
*Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker* *v4Now - *an eintellego Networks service skeeve@v4now.com ; www.v4now.com
Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve
facebook.com/v4now ; http://twitter.com/networkceoau linkedin.com/in/skeeve
twitter.com/theispguy ; blog: www.theispguy.com ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve
IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 8:08 PM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Dear SIG members
A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election
of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at
APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.
https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txtIf agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.
https://www.apnic.net/mailinglistsIf successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the
APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.
To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in
the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing
List before the conference.
More background to this proposal is available at:
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-electionsRegards
Adam
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
Proposer: Masato Yamanishi
myamanis@gmail.com
- Problem statement
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible
voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such
rule.
Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants
have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is
different in each election.
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair
agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the
community discussion.
- SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and
Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held
at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair
stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both
elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for
long time.
In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term
if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such
alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as
requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is
same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)
- Objective of policy change
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as
well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting
clear rule for eligible voters.
In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current
practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when
current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's
term of service.
- Situation in other regions
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
- Proposed policy solution
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who
register to Confer, or its successor in future.
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which
means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's
term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG
Chair election or not
we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election
By revising SIG Chair's term of service
we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice
we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed
Disadvantages:
APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether
each voter is registered participants.
There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Impact on resource holders
No direct impact
- References
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
APNIC SIG Guidelines
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hi All,
As you know, it is our current practice that Chair/Co-Chair doesn't propose a policy by himself/herself in recent APNIC Policy SIG.
However, while it seems that many community members basically agreed with these problem when I presented them at Singapore < https://conference.apnic.net/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/58992/ambiguouts-po...
,
nobody has picked them up and propose solutions even after 3 years. In addition, I believe I'm one of persons who felt these problems most seriously through my service as Co-Chair/Chair. So, I decided to propose these solutions by myself.
Please note that I have asked Chair's responsibility of this proposal in Policy SIG discussion to Sumon, Co-Chair, to avoid a conflict of interests related with this proposal. Also, I will not run Policy SIG Chair when my term will be end at APNIC 43 in next Feb or Mar. so that I don't have a conflict of interests in that meaning as well.
Thus, please accept my replies and comments for this proposal as one of community views, not Chair's view.
Regards, Matt
2016-09-05 19:08 GMT+09:00 Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net:
Dear SIG members
A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election
of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at
APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.
https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txtIf agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.
https://www.apnic.net/mailinglistsIf successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the
APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.
To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in
the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing
List before the conference.
More background to this proposal is available at:
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-electionsRegards
Adam
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
Proposer: Masato Yamanishi
myamanis@gmail.com
- Problem statement
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible
voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such
rule.
Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants
have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is
different in each election.
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair
agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the
community discussion.
- SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and
Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held
at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair
stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both
elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for
long time.
In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term
if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such
alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as
requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is
same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)
- Objective of policy change
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as
well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting
clear rule for eligible voters.
In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current
practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when
current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's
term of service.
- Situation in other regions
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
- Proposed policy solution
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who
register to Confer, or its successor in future.
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which
means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's
term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG
Chair election or not
we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election
By revising SIG Chair's term of service
we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice
we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed
Disadvantages:
APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether
each voter is registered participants.
There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Impact on resource holders
No direct impact
- References
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
APNIC SIG Guidelines
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Hello,
For the AFRINIC region, selection(election) is not just based on those present (as one could consider remote participants to be present). Its however based on those "physically present" in the room who meet the voter eligibility criteria[1] at the time of conducting the election. So if someone started the meeting and left right before the election process commenced then he/she is not eligible as only the physical hands are checked and counted.
What is being proposed in relation to APNIC chair/co-chair seem to be similar to how the AFRINIC Co-Chairs terms handled; The 2 co-chairs are elected in a staggered manner and serve for 2 years, this ensures that there is always at least one experienced co-chair at every-point in time. However there can be a situation where a Co-Chair resign at the same time the other co-chair's term is expiring and that could imply have 2 new co-chairs on board (assuming the co-chair whose term expired is not re-contesting or did not win the election). We have had a situation like that in the past but in those cases, we've been either lucky to get good co-chair elected or the out-going co-chair go re-elected. Normally when a co-chair resigns, an election to replace the outgoing co-chair is conducted at face2face and the newly elected person completes the term of the co-chair.
Overall as a former Co-Chair for the AFRINIC region, i would say the staggered term has worked very well for us.
Regards 1. There are 3 of such criteria: Has registered for the meeting (and possesses the Meeting Badge as proof). Resides in a country within AFRINIC service region. Is not a staff member of AFRINIC or another RIR
On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net wrote:
Dear SIG members
A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election
of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at
APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.
https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txtIf agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho
Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.
https://www.apnic.net/mailinglistsIf successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the
APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.
To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in
the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing
List before the conference.
More background to this proposal is available at:
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-electionsRegards
Adam
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
Proposer: Masato Yamanishi
myamanis@gmail.com
- Problem statement
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible
voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such
rule.
Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants
have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is
different in each election.
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair
agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the
community discussion.
- SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and
Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held
at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair
stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both
elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for
long time.
In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term
if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such
alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as
requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is
same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)
- Objective of policy change
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as
well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting
clear rule for eligible voters.
In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current
practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when
current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's
term of service.
- Situation in other regions
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
- Proposed policy solution
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election
to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is
held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who
register to Confer, or its successor in future.
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which
means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years.
To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's
term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages:
By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG
Chair election or not
we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election
By revising SIG Chair's term of service
we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice
we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current
Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed
Disadvantages:
APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether
each voter is registered participants.
There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Impact on resource holders
No direct impact
- References
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes
https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
APNIC SIG Guidelines
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
If ALL current Chair/Co-Chair resigne or are removed at the same time and the another successor who don't know or share the background and situations of this forum become New Chair/Co-Chair, who do care for them?
At the point of the stable/continuous forum management, I think that there is no need to revise the part of this guideline.
Regards, Hiroki
Subject: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines From: Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net Date: Mon Sep 05 2016 19:08:46 GMT+0900
Dear SIG members
A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.
https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt
If agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.
https://www.apnic.net/mailinglists
If successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.
To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing List before the conference.
More background to this proposal is available at:
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Regards
Adam
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
Proposer: Masato Yamanishi myamanis@gmail.com
- Problem statement
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such rule.
Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is different in each election.
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the community discussion.
- SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for long time.
In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)
- Objective of policy change
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting clear rule for eligible voters.
In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Situation in other regions
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
- Proposed policy solution
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages: By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
- we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG Chair election or not
- we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election
By revising SIG Chair's term of service
- we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice
- we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed
Disadvantages: APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether each voter is registered participants.
There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Impact on resource holders
No direct impact
- References
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
APNIC SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines
Kawabata-san (and maybe Randy),
So, can you support it if I will revise it as follows?
2. SIG Chair's term of service I would like to propose revising SIG Chair's term of service as follows. - Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years (same as current SIG guideline) - If Chair election and Co-Chair election are happen in same year, Co-Chair's (or Co-Chairs') term of service should be one year as Chair's and Co-Chairs' term of service are staggered - If current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed, the succesor's term should be remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair
Any thought?
Regards, Matt
2016-09-28 15:52 GMT+09:00 Hiroki Kawabata kawabata@nic.ad.jp:
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
If ALL current Chair/Co-Chair resigne or are removed at the same time and the another successor who don't know or share the background and situations of this forum become New Chair/Co-Chair, who do care for them?
At the point of the stable/continuous forum management, I think that there is no need to revise the part of this guideline.
Regards, Hiroki
Subject: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines From: Adam Gosling adam@apnic.net Date: Mon Sep 05 2016 19:08:46 GMT+0900
Dear SIG members
A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka.
https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt
If agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG.
https://www.apnic.net/mailinglists
If successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period.
To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing List before the conference.
More background to this proposal is available at:
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Regards
Adam
Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term
Proposer: Masato Yamanishi myamanis@gmail.com
- Problem statement
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such rule.
Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is different in each election.
Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the community discussion.
- SIG Chair's term of service
While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for long time.
In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair)
- Objective of policy change
The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting clear rule for eligible voters.
In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Situation in other regions
Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
- Proposed policy solution
- Eligible voters in SIG Chair election
I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is held.
In this context, registered participants include remote participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future.
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed.
- Advantages / Disadvantages
Advantages: By setting clear rule for eligible voters,
- we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG Chair election or not
- we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election
By revising SIG Chair's term of service
- we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice
- we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed
Disadvantages: APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether each voter is registered participants.
There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service.
- Impact on resource holders
No direct impact
- References
Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections
Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs
APNIC SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
Yamanishi-san,
Thanks for your comment and revise proposal. Yes, I can support.
Regards, Hiroki
Subject: Re: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines From: Masato Yamanishi myamanis@gmail.com Date: Fri Sep 30 2016 04:24:17 GMT+0900
Kawabata-san (and maybe Randy),
So, can you support it if I will revise it as follows?
2. SIG Chair's term of service I would like to propose revising SIG Chair's term of service as follows. - Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years (same as current SIG guideline) - If Chair election and Co-Chair election are happen in same year, Co-Chair's (or Co-Chairs') term of service should be one year as Chair's and Co-Chairs' term of service are staggered - If current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed, the succesor's term should be remaining term of current Chair/Co-ChairAny thought?
Regards, Matt
2016-09-28 15:52 GMT+09:00 Hiroki Kawabata <kawabata@nic.ad.jp mailto:kawabata@nic.ad.jp>:
2. SIG Chair's term of service I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed. If ALL current Chair/Co-Chair resigne or are removed at the same time and the another successor who don't know or share the background and situations of this forum become New Chair/Co-Chair, who do care for them? At the point of the stable/continuous forum management, I think that there is no need to revise the part of this guideline. Regards, Hiroki Subject: [sig-policy] Proposal to revise SIG guidelines From: Adam Gosling <adam@apnic.net <mailto:adam@apnic.net>> Date: Mon Sep 05 2016 19:08:46 GMT+0900 Dear SIG members A proposal to modify the APNIC SIG Guidelines relating to the election of SIG Chairs and Co-Chairs has been submitted for consideration at APNIC 42 im Colombo, Sri Lanka. https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt <https://www.apnic.net/sig-chair-elections/proposed-revision.txt> If agreed. these changes will affect all APNIC SIGs from APNIC 43 in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Discussion and call for consensus will take place in the Policy SIG. https://www.apnic.net/mailinglists <https://www.apnic.net/mailinglists> If successful in the Policy SIG, a consensus call will be made at the APNIC Member Meeting. There will be no final Comment Period. To ensure those not travelling to APNIC 42 are able to participate in the discussion, you are invited to comment on the Policy SIG Mailing List before the conference. More background to this proposal is available at: https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections <https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections> Regards Adam ------------------------------------------------------- Revising eligible voters of Chair election and Chair's term ------------------------------------------------------- Proposer: Masato Yamanishi myamanis@gmail.com <mailto:myamanis@gmail.com> 1. Problem statement -------------------- 1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election In current SIG guidelines, we have no rule or guideline about eligible voters in SIG Chair election and we have two issues by the lack of such rule. Firstly, we need to have clear guideline whether remote participants have voting rights for SIG Chair election since current practice is different in each election. Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend the community discussion. 2. SIG Chair's term of service While SIG guidelines says "Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years.", both elections were held at same meeting in many cases, in particular when a current Co-Chair stand for the position of Chair. With this current practice having both elections at same meeting, we are not seeing any significant issues for long time. In addition, there is no alternative condition for the successor's term if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed though such alternative condition is necessary to maintain staggered term as requested by SIG guideline. (a.k.a. the successor's term of service is same as remaining term of resigned or removed Chair) 2. Objective of policy change ----------------------------- The objective is preventing confusions related to remote participant as well as mitigating possible frauds in SIG Chair election by setting clear rule for eligible voters. In addition, we can also expect aligning SIG guideline with current practice as well as resolving unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed by revising SIG Chair's term of service. 3. Situation in other regions ----------------------------- Please refer following page made by Adam Gosling Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs <https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs> 4. Proposed policy solution --------------------------- 1. Eligible voters in SIG Chair election I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is held. In this context, registered participants include remote participants who register to Confer, or its successor in future. 2. SIG Chair's term of service I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. To keep this alighment, I would like to propose limiting the successor's term to remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair if current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed. 5. Advantages / Disadvantages ----------------------------- Advantages: By setting clear rule for eligible voters, - we can avoid confusion whether remote participant cast vote for SIG Chair election or not - we can mitigate frauds in SIG Chair election By revising SIG Chair's term of service - we can resolve a conflict between SIG guideline and current practice - we can resolve unclearness of the successor's term when current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed Disadvantages: APNIC staff may need to spend some additional time to confirm whether each voter is registered participants. There is no disadvantage by revising SIG Chair's term of service. 6. Impact on resource holders ----------------------------- No direct impact 7. References ------------- Chair Election Procedure Review by Adam Gosling https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections <https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/chair-elections> Comparison of RIR SIG/WG Chair Election Processes https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs <https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs> APNIC SIG Guidelines https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines <https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/sigs/sig-guidelines> * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net <mailto:sig-policy@lists.apnic.net> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy <https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy>
yamanishi san
So, can you support it if I will revise it as follows?
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose revising SIG Chair's term of service as follows.
- Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur in alternate years (same as current SIG guideline)
- If Chair election and Co-Chair election are happen in same year, Co-Chair's (or Co-Chairs') term of service should be one year as Chair's and Co-Chairs' term of service are staggered
- If current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed, the succesor's term should be remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair
this makes sense for the terms of service part.
but what about the voter suppression issues?
randy
Hi Randy,
this makes sense for the terms of service part.
Thank you for your understanding.
but what about the voter suppression issues?
I'm doubt current my proposal solves all possible issues, but I have not yet find better solution. So, it is appreciated if you could more inputs as I can improve it.
Regards, Matt
2016-10-04 18:27 GMT+09:00 Randy Bush randy@psg.com:
yamanishi san
So, can you support it if I will revise it as follows?
- SIG Chair's term of service
I would like to propose revising SIG Chair's term of service as follows.
- Elections occur yearly. Chair elections and Co-Chair elections occur
in
alternate years (same as current SIG guideline)
- If Chair election and Co-Chair election are happen in same year, Co-Chair's (or Co-Chairs') term of service should be one year as Chair's and Co-Chairs' term of service are staggered
- If current Chair/Co-Chair resigned or was removed, the succesor's term should be remaining term of current Chair/Co-Chair
this makes sense for the terms of service part.
but what about the voter suppression issues?
randy
but what about the voter suppression issues?
I'm doubt current my proposal solves all possible issues
are there actually any real issues? have we had any actual problem with who votes for wg [co-]chairs?
note my use of "voter suppression." i am from a country where fear of voter fraud (when none has actually occurred) is being used to create systems and mechanisms to prevent significant portions of the population from voting.
is there an actual real problem we have or are experiencing that the voter qualification part of your proposal addresses?
randy
Hi Randy,
I know two real frauds in past 5 years, and one of community members told me there were more in past. So, it is real issue.
Regards, Matt
2016-10-04 19:01 GMT+09:00 Randy Bush randy@psg.com:
but what about the voter suppression issues?
I'm doubt current my proposal solves all possible issues
are there actually any real issues? have we had any actual problem with who votes for wg [co-]chairs?
note my use of "voter suppression." i am from a country where fear of voter fraud (when none has actually occurred) is being used to create systems and mechanisms to prevent significant portions of the population from voting.
is there an actual real problem we have or are experiencing that the voter qualification part of your proposal addresses?
randy
I know two real frauds in past 5 years, and one of community members told me there were more in past. So, it is real issue.
im my culture, those are unsubstantiated accusations. please be explicit. i do not care if one confused person voted. in what sig elections was there a real effort to change the result in an illegitimate manner, and by whom?
randy
let me put it another way.
we say very broadly, to the entire world, that the policy sig is open, open, open. so on what basis should we restrict who can vote?
randy
People not concerned (non members of APNIC) should not be allowed to vote.
--- Cordialement,
Bertrand CHERRIER b.cherrier@micrologic.nc
MICRO LOGIC SYSTEMS https://www.mls.nc Vente & maintenance réseaux Informatique Fournisseur de Sensations Internet Service clientèle au 36.67.76 (58Frs/mn)
Le 04.10.2016 20:11, Randy Bush a écrit :
let me put it another way.
we say very broadly, to the entire world, that the policy sig is open, open, open. so on what basis should we restrict who can vote?
randy
sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy *
sig-policy mailing list sig-policy@lists.apnic.net https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
People not concerned (non members of APNIC) should not be allowed to vote.
then apnic should drop the hypocrisy of saying policy is open
randy
Hi Randy,
Yes, I prefer this way to discuss and improve it :-)
Certainly, the openness is very important, and that is the reason why I didn't add more conditions as other regions are doing. <https://www.apnic.net/sig-guidelines/chair-elections/other-rirs> I just added voters should be registered participants including remote ones, and I don't think it will be a barrier since there is no charge for remote participants.
In addition, we need to consider a balance between openness and equality. Certainly, we cannot secure the equality only by asking registration for voters, but at least we have more information about who have voting rights for each election. (I'm not saying voting results, like who voted to whom) Currently, we don't have any information about who was eligible voter, who voted actually, etc. Without these information, I'm afraid we cannot secure the equality even when we have a concern.
Regards, Matt
2016-10-04 23:41 GMT+09:00 Randy Bush randy@psg.com:
let me put it another way.
we say very broadly, to the entire world, that the policy sig is open, open, open. so on what basis should we restrict who can vote?
randy
Hi Randy,
Yes, there are so many ways, but we should choose one of them which can be reached consensus by the community. Since several people are now complaining about current election process, I beleive we cannot say we have a consensus for that any more. Thus this problem exist.
Regards, Matt
2016-10-05 13:10 GMT+09:00 Randy Bush randy@psg.com:
In addition, we need to consider a balance between openness and equality.
or my version
randy
Activity Summary
- 2437 days inactive
- 2437 days old
- sig-policy@lists.apnic.net
- 9 participants
- 33 comments