[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [apnic-talk] Elections

Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Elections
From: "Naresh Ajwani"
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 18:46:08 +0530
- 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?

Thanks Terry, these challenging thoughts are the way forward...more we get into
"what next", more we wud get closer to the real issues and solutions.

Regards and best wishes

Naresh Ajwani

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Terry Manderson
Sent: 09 March 2010 18:14
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] Elections

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
http://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/organization/structure/apnic-executive-council/E
C-roles-and-obligations). 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
"http://www.apnic.net/about-APNIC/organization/structure/apnic-executive-council/
ec-members" 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
items.

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?

Cheers
Terry

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]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk

_______________________________________________
apnic-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/apnic-talk

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