Re: [apnic-talk] APNIC EC Election Review Panel
We've gone from a few demands to even more and more demands. What's next?
I think gerrymandering the management and EC is not going to lead to stronger management. I also think limiting the DGs term to 5 years is crazy, the turn over, management style changes in conjunction with a quick churn of the EC will make for a very much weakened organisation and not one I can support.
One of the issues is that few economies appear to nominate for the EC. As I've repeatedly said before, maybe you need to start working on encouraging fixing that, otherwise we may end up with EC members who aren't actually committed and interested. That's not going to help the EC be effective.
I think "Top management salaries and calss of travel discuss at apnci meeting." is just sour grapes on behalf of people who didn't get elected.
The expenses and member fees issue - everyone one wants all costs to be reduced. But it's not clear that it would be radically changed. Again, I go back to the fact that, despite clearly my comments being ignored that APNICs expenses/budget appear to be very in line with ARIN and RIPE, they aren't doing too badly.
I again, think that these proposals would as a whole weaken APNIC, create a lack of certainty and consistency that we have. I suspect they'd raise costs not reduce them, especially the constant turn over and lack of long term planning etc.
MMC
On 11/07/2010, at 7:43 PM, Sameer Bhagwat wrote:
> Lets focus on the issues here. I know some of us are not in the
> position to attend apnic meetings. We are not lucky as people from developed countries.
> We can only say on this email. how many of you agree to these? say it on this talk.
>
> 1. One member One Vote.
> 2. Limited period for ECs. Maximum 2 terms.
> 3. Independent election panel.
> 4. Minimum regional EC representation. Permanent reservation of 1 0r 2 seats
> for each sub region.
> 5. Online only voting process, accessible only to the independent election panel.
> 6. Director general for maximum 5 year only.
> 7. Top management equal representation among sub regions. so they have
> knowledge of our issues.
> 8. Decrease apnic expenses and decrease member fee.
> 9. Top management salaries and calss of travel discuss at apnci meeting.
> 10. Minimum one sub regional meeting per year.
>
> We do not need anyone to make a policy. Current EC is represnting our membership.
> they must note our discuss and make changes.
>
>
> Regards
> SB
>
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:16:29 +0530 wrote
> >
> MMC,
>
>
>
> You stand right!
>
>
>
> Simple terms -
>
>
>
> 1) Anything and everything at APNIC can be changed by a policy.
>
> 2) If balanced representation is a problem, propose a policy and
> seek voting... everything will then fall "in".
>
>
>
> Honestly, it is not fair to accuse or comment on anyone with or
> without evidence in a mailing list, while laid down procedures
> provision such actions anycase.
>
>
>
> (Off the record - Infact, one not going thru the laid by-laws or
> provisions is more regretting than one complying and still getting
> accused!)
>
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> Kusumba S
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 11-07-2010 14:01, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
>
>
> On 11/07/2010, at 3:53 PM, Sameer Bhagwat wrote:
>
>
>
> Assalam-u-alaikum Aftab,
>
> Good question but is Asia and Europe or America region same. Do they all have same problems? If yes, then why we need 4 rirs? all regions can have only one registry.
>
>
>
> Why does any country need an NIR then?
>
>
>
>
> Aftab, we have our own problems here and we together have responsibility to address them. One can only compare if one is equal to the other in all aspects.
>
>
>
> As I pointed out in a previous post, the budget and expenditure ratios look pretty much the same between APNIC, RIPE and ARIN. If you want more APNIC money to go toward IPV6 training etc, then maybe raise it as a policy?
>
> The problem APNIC appears to have is a group of people who, for internal political reasons want to take control of APNIC and seem to have no moral issues with blaming everyone else and calling everyone else corrupt and incompetent without evidence and with complete disrespect to people on the EC and the DG.
>
> MMC