1. I agree to your point that there shall be a model to ethically parent the NIR members as a membership class in APNIC. In fact there is no intent to discriminate any member, who is direct or indirect. The justifiable reason that I
could interpret on your suggestion is, NIR is none but an extended arm of APNIC (like distributors/wholesaler/VAS operators). NIR does nothing but deliver the services of APNIC in a format, that may be a need of the local environment. Henceforth, members of
NIR shall be an APNIC member, perhaps under a different class or format. If you have any idea in this line, please propose. 2. Limited period for ECs; I feel the inputs to be logical and practical. Instead of debarring totally, it shall be a break for a said term. This gives people with different viewpoints apply their strategies in between. 3. Like appointing an Election Review Panel, we shall appoint one panel by removing "review" too.:-) 4. Regional EC representation: The following is regional description of APNIC, as shown in the annual report. 5. Online Voting: The intent of online voting is nothing but to eliminate the proxy-exchange (swap) model that prevails in the election process, which leads to cartel. Let members elect directly who they want to. If that is settled
half of the election issues will be settled. Online voting resolves it. 6. Period of DG: I agree with this point. It should be left on to ECs. Let the objectives be transparent. 7. Equal representation in top management: In my opinion, the selection of employees including that of the top management should be left on to DG. There shall not be any reservation for employees, as employee selection is based on a
particular position and the skills required for that position. Top management is not elected but selected. The reform demanded is for election. On expenses, I think too much discussions have happened already. If there is a desperation we become innovative. When there is a desperation/objective/intent to control cost, it is very much possible. At least during the economic crisis,
the corporate world understood and accepted the importance, of getting more from less.
Fortunately we are from this part of the world, where we try to get more of less through unmatchable innovations – to know what extent innovation shall be, click on this link
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/anil_gupta_india_s_hidden_hotbeds_of_invention.html - with no understanding on the ground reality, there shall be no judgement.
Desperation made & makes the world to innovate ideas that are unimaginable. To understand this, it’s not appropriate to question what difference it makes to TATA by reducing the cost of IP, but need to ask what made TATA to innovate
a 2000$ car. That will answer, what difference it will make to TATA on reducing the cost of IP too. As you rightly said, at the end of the day, it’s the ECs who need to act, but with no desperation, there shall be no innovation. PS: Azim premji, chairman of Wipro, personal net-worth - 17 billion USD, travels in Economy. Narayanamoorthy, founder of Infosys, still travels in economy. Nothing wrong in travelling in business class, nothing wrong in economy too. Thanks & Regards, Desi Valli -----Original Message----- >From the point of view of an independent interested individual. On 11/07/2010, at 8:13 PM, Sameer Bhagwat wrote: > > 1. One member One Vote. Lets look at this from what we know. >From the EC minutes of the 18th May (http://www.apnic.net/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/21417/2010-05-18-ecminutes.pdf) there are 2274 APNIC members across the 52 economies. The breakdown by economy is: 28% AU 15% IN 11% Other 8% HK 7% NZ 5% SG 5% PH (rest omitted) If you propose one member one vote, then any economy with an NIR who collects/acquires their in-country APNIC members as NIR members will effectively leave an entire economy to 1 vote (or near enough) as an NIR is an APNIC member. Compare
that with other countries that do not have NIRs. Is this really a balance of voting discretion? The obvious example is JP. 3% of members (see the graph) yet the country represents the greatest number of IPv6 addresses and the second largest amount of IPv4 addresses for all economies. (see http://stats.research.icann.org/rir/APNIC/IPv4/
and http://stats.research.icann.org/rir/APNIC/IPv6/) While I believe that the tiered voting structure might need some work, asking for one member/one vote in a resource driven (versus service driven) membership organisation is premature unless you can somehow ethically parent NIR members
as a membership class in APNIC. Basically it needs more review. > 2. Limited period for ECs. Maximum 2 terms. Without defining term length, this is a little limited. Perhaps if terms were in the order of 4 years each, and after 2 consecutive terms an individual may be renominated after a 1 term break. > 3. Independent election panel. This should be directed to the election review panel. > 4. Minimum regional EC representation. Permanent reservation of 1 0r 2 seats
> for each sub region. define sub-region? Do you mean NIR? or something else? > 5. Online only voting process, accessible only to the independent election panel. This should be directed to the election review panel. Although, from my counting there exists about 12201 exercisable votes amongst the APNIC membership. How many votes were used for the recent elections? Noting that both Online and in-person votes could be used. Take a look at this very quick spreadsheet: Size Number votes per Total Votes Percentage X-Large 16 64 1024 8.392754692 v-Large 34 32 1088 8.917301861 Large 136 16 2176 17.83460372 Medium 333 8 2664 21.83427588 Small 916 4 3664 30.03032538 V-Small 746 2 1492 12.22850586 Assoc 93 1 93 0.762232604 Total 2274 n/a 12201 100 It strikes me that collectively the arguments about the large members having the voting power could be found wanting. > 6. Director general for maximum 5 year only. No. The EC sets the term of employment for the DG. That is their (the EC's) job. > 7. Top management equal representation among sub regions. so they have
> knowledge of our issues. What do mean by top management here? For all my years of involvement in the APNIC meetings there have been open mic sessions where anyone from any region (in or outside of the APNIC region!) may bring forth any item of concern. You may or may not be aware, but all discussions
at the mic are transcribed for posterity. > 8. Decrease apnic expenses and decrease member fee. As I am aware APNIC expenses are driven by the number and scope of the APNIC projects. To reduce APNIC expenses, you must first reduce the APNIC projects. Which projects would like like removed first? IPv6 Outreach? Research and Development? Training? > 9. Top management salaries and calss of travel discuss at apnci meeting. While many organisations/corporates publish the total remuneration of individual executives over a particular level, discussion about setting salaries is up to the EC.
While many see the travel class as an issue in cost terms, I would be asking why doesn't all APNIC staff fly business class? Aren't they all valued employees who deserve a healthy travel experience when executing their duties for APNIC?
Perhaps if anything I would much rather entertain the idea of discussing what was achieved at the various meetings that APNIC staff/other travel to attend in the idea of transparency. > 10. Minimum one sub regional meeting per year. The APNIC meetings are moved around the region. Any region can seek to have a meeting. keep an eye on http://www.apnic.net/events/host-an-event > > We do not need anyone to make a policy. Current EC is represnting our membership. > they must note our discuss and make changes. > What you are talking about here is in the control of the membership. You really should dig up Akinori's presentation (maybe someone can find it?). To put it simply, (and since I personally don't see sig-policy as the right place for
this) a WG or SIG needs to be formed at the request of the membership, sensible/logical and almost impartial chairs need to sought and appointed (probably via an in-room vote). The SIG would then be chartered to propose through policy-like inputs a set of
specific changes for the membership to vote on. This seems to me like new ground, the only similar process (as far as I am aware) was the fees working group. Cheers Terry _______________________________________________ apnic-talk mailing list apnic-talk at lists dot apnic dot net http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk Message sent using India’s leading Hosted Microsoft Exchange service. For details visit http://net4.in/net4app/aspx/Exchange/exchangeIntro.aspx Please consider the environment before printing.
|