[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [apnic-talk] Elections

Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Elections
From: "Naresh Ajwani"
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:41:11 +0530

Dear David,


We don’t wait for an accident to occur to take an INSUARANCE. J


I don’t think there is any challenge over the need of an electoral college for conducting the elections.


Now let me elaborate further on other two areas of concern:


1.     When we have proportionate voting strengths to the size of our members why can’t we have proportionate representation? Today world’s biggest brand is the 5 circles of Olympics.  The most respected brand in the world where just one participant from a country is lead by the mast holder in the same esteem as the one representing a continent with 1000 members.  In Olympics, the size doesn’t matter and that’s why it is more respectable than the other brands. Never Mind, If we can have NRO NC election on single vote per member basis, why can’t we have the same for the EC election?


1.     When there is a fixed term for the ICANN Director, why can’t we have the fixed term for the EC in APNIC?



The call is ours, should we have the similar brand value of Olympics or allow the organisations like ITU to puncture us forever because of a few ?


Regards and best wishes


Naresh Ajwani




From: David Conrad [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 10 March 2010 01:47
To: Naresh Ajwani
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Elections




On Mar 8, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Naresh Ajwani wrote:

We all represent ourselves but you must have heard that the power corrupts and “absolute power” for very long is a sure shot receipe-evidences are avaliable world wide.


I can, of course, counter with my own cliches: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."


Since you are proposing changing the status quo, I suspect the onus is upon you to demonstrate something is broken and needs fixing.






apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>