[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [apnic-talk] Elections

Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Elections
From: Terry Manderson
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 22:43:51 +1000
I'm somewhat concerned by the aspect that regions/economies need specific 
representation on the EC.

In my understanding when a person becomes a member of the EC they are there to 
perform in the best interests of the membership (as noted in 
 They do not, and should not hold their employer, or country of origin above 
the consideration of APNIC, the Secretariat, and the members when fulfilling 
their duty as an EC member.

I would think that ANY APNIC member (or even interested stakeholder) could 
contact one or all of the EC to express concerns or views. Looking at 
 suggests you can as there are "Email me" tags for the EC. (I'd try the Chair 
first and foremost)

Similarly - there is this list as well as the policy-sig which are open to all 
for transparency. In terms of wanting face to face dialogue - that I can't 
speak to. I do know EC members are rather busy at member meetings, too busy for 
community consultation?? I don't know.

So it appears (from other posts) there are concerns about several things, and 
ideally it would be nice to maintain a rational discussion on items that could 
easily become emotionally charged:
        - EC being (non)responsive to economies that do not have a link to an 
EC member
                - is there a grievance procedure you are comfortable with?
        - the election process, incl. issue resolution
        - the voting capacities of members
        - the power that the EC does (or is perceived) to have
                - over policy
                - over the secretariat
                - over elections
        (others areas?)

I have no skin in this game, so it would glib of me to side on any of the above 

So what would you request of the membership? (as it is a membership item)
        - Allow all economies on a board? (56 board members!?!)
        - change the election process?
                - But how?
        - change the voting structure?
                - to what?
                - and would that produce a better/worse situation?
        - change the structure of the EC?
                - have a AC like ARIN to deal with policy?
                - have the responsibility of the EC reduced to just matters of 
the secretariat?
                - have a nominations/election committee with independent bodies?

Just so you know, I'm not proposing any of the above I'm throwing out the "well 
what now?" and trying to work out the scope of the concern and if you and 
others have thought through the situation beyond the obvious frustration of the 
unusual proceedings of the EC election in KL?


On 09/03/2010, at 7:05 PM, Brajesh Jain wrote:

> Dear Yamanishi San,
> Actually the concern is that regions not having representation in EC feel
> that their view is not heard. If actually it is being heard, there is very
> less visibility that it is indeed so.
> Hence it is appropriate that there is mechanism to hear and respond to all.
> EC representation gives that confidence.
> With regards
> Brajesh Jain
> Chair
> ISOC Delhi Chapter

apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>