[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [apnic-talk] apnic-talk Digest, Vol 71, Issue 51

Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] apnic-talk Digest, Vol 71, Issue 51
From: Matthew Moyle-Croft
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:42:44 +1030

On 10/03/2010, at 6:34 PM, Rajesh Chharia wrote:

I repeat that all is on the records and now tell me what’s wrong if we lost the confidence in the body responsible for the election and therefore wanted to be a scrutiniser/observer as per the norms laid-“NON EC member and not voted”. 

My understanding was that scrutineers were meant to be NON-APNIC members.  At the very least they are meant to be independent of the EC candidates.   Hence why the other RIRs typically act as each other's as I understand it.   

What is wrong is that you've now admitted to trying to arrange to have a non-independant scrutineer to give inside information on the vote counting process. 

This is extremely concerning.

MMC
(speaking for himself).
_______________________________________________
apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>