[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

[apnic-talk] Election reforms-Detail

Subject: [apnic-talk] Election reforms-Detail
From: "Naresh Ajwani"
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:44:38 +0530

Dear Matthew,

 

Atleast Independent electoral body has the acceptance from other members also. Please feel free to refer to the old mails from other members.

 

You seem to have assumed acceptance where there is none.  Certainly not from me.

 

Consensus can never be 100% but please don’t keep hitting one country-it sounds racial and be careful.

 

Changing to member based in the face of IPv4 exhaustion seems to be a way of stacking the vote by encouraging people to join for no other reason than voting.

 

Wud appreciate your further elaboration to understand your view point better.

 

you have, despite demanding change, actually offered no concrete changes other than one line suggestions.

 

I have compiled my suggestions and motivation from the old mails to correct your repeatedly imposed perceptions of one liner suggestionsJ. It’s classified into three parts:

 

1.     Suggestions

2.     Thoughts from other members

3.     Motivation

                                                                                                     

I.                SUGESSTIONS:

 

“It’s about concerns which broadly are as follows:

 

1.     An Election Body shall be responsible for conducting elections -You cannot be a Judge in your own Cause”.

 

2.     Guaranteed result, because of state of origin and distribution of votes with one block based on the number of IPs procurement, is not a true democracy or bottom-up process. Sadly, the voting process reflects on the skewed understanding of democracy and shall be corrected - Internet is the leveller and not the divider; “one who can afford to procure more IPs can’t have more rights than the one who can’t”

 

3.     Specified terms so that all can get the representation in decision making of Internet policies. Internet enables/connects any part of the world; the current process is creating incumbency-fresh thoughts/approach is must for the growth of Internet.

“The proposed reforms stand for all 56 countries and my last mail-point 2 i.e Voting Pattern needs a review; please think from the Internet perspective-it fills up the divide. Let’s attempt to change and give all inclusive approach.”

 

“This transparency has to come-how voting took place, number of votes casted to all candidates....we can’t limit this information to selectd few.....”

 

New thoughts toward NIR are more meaningful and inspiring for the members, though they may not be an issue with the already NIR possessing members, viz., Why for so long there was a suspension of the NIR process... who were responsible for it... Why ITU shall come and give us thoughts of CIR?”

 

NIR was just one of the examples J

 

Nowhere have I said that we should change the entire election system. Please refer to my mail commenting over 3 broad areas of concern. These concerns can be vetted by any expert/specialist who wud also join the chorus.

 

1.     We need an electoral body—the existing system forces us to be a Judge for our own cause.

2.     We need a process to facilitate 48 other countries to have the representation in EC-­­-- We can’t have skewed democratic values and invite “Cartel/collusion thoughts/comments” for our systems.

3.     We need new thoughts/faces on regular basis to lead us--- Example: why not you be that new face? J

 

“All three solutions are reflecting the concerns too. J I paste one of three areas again and highlight/underline the same, for your reference:

 

We need an electoral body-the existing system forces us to be a Judge for our own cause.

 

I elaborate the same also for your convenience: If I am an EC and also be responsible for conducting/deciding on the election issues/concerns of the contestants, it isn’t appropriate. If u want me to elaborate further on the origin of the concern, it is possible but that way we wud lose our objective-“Existence”; much above all the petty concerns.

 

We shall focus on the positive side of this debate-if u think, there is no need of electoral body and the ECs shall be responsible for the same, I am okay to drop this debate at this juncture itself.”

 

So why didn’t we leave the "timeline issue for the proxy registeration" also on independent friends from other RIR? I propose to elaborate the issue further but we can't have norms/conflict of interest at our coneveniences and that’s why I have proposed the Electoral College as first area of concern. Whats wrong with this proposal; The Electoral College can have friends from other RIR but they shall not be accountable to the ECs.”

 

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?

 

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

 

“I am here to particpate in the debate for Right Rules and Regulations and therefore invite you all for the following:

 

1.     Is it wrong to have electoral body for conducting the elections?

2.     Is it wrong to have voting pattern for EC as it is for NRO NC election?

3.     Is it wrong to have fresh blood/thought on regular basis?”

 

1.     Once we agree the way-forward on the election reforms, be assured that the proposed policy would follow.

2.     The proportional representation because of wealth i.e. “more IP addresses mean more voting strength” is what I am proposing to correct,

3.     The Formats of debate varies and we shall allow the same J

 

II. Thoughts from other members:

 

“- 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?”

 

“More seriously, the election system used by APNIC was initially devised in a timeframe when the Internet was much less deployed than it is now and the web was only beginning to be used.  I'm sure it has evolved somewhat since then and will continue to evolve.  Moving towards full electronic voting might make sense now that entire countries aren't behind 9.6Kbps links.

 

 

 

III.             MOTIVATION DETAILING:

 

“If we want to be an enlightened organisation, we shall not hesitate in surfacing issues/concerns. Yours, that matter, everybody's help in this regard wud be highly appreciated”

 

“In my opinion, “Internet is the leveller” but the table and the process of Elections are distinctively dividing the region- I may be wrong in assuming the same but really dont know that how Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and many such countries can get the representation in current EC structure.

 

I also don’t know that how can we check a situation like that as "Security Council" if 4 EC members from 3 countries of the same belt i.e. “majority” decides to block, say for example some country wants to have NIR.”

 

 

Before any reforms are undertaken, one needs to understand the past scenario and the composition of EC (given below) which can be a good starting point:

 

Year

EC1

EC2

EC4

EC5

EC3

EC6

EC7

EC8

1998

Toru Takahashi ,
Japan

Geoff Huston,
Australia

Xing Li,
China

Srisakdi Charmonman,
Thailand

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

 

1999

Toru Takahashi ,
Japan

Oh Kwang Sok,
Korea

Xing Li,
China

Tommi Chen,
Malaysia

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Geoff Huston,
Australia

 

2000

Kazunori Konishi,
Japan

Oh Kwang Sok,
Korea

Xing Li,
China

Tommi Chen,
Malaysia

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Geoff Huston,
Australia

 

2001

MAEMURA Akinori,
Japan

Byung-Kyu Kim,
 Korea

Xing Li,
China

Qian Hualin,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Geoff Huston,
Australia

 

2002

MAEMURA Akinori,
Japan

Byung-Kyu Kim,
 Korea

Xing Li,
China

Qian Hualin,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Geoff Huston,
Australia

 

2003

MAEMURA Akinori ,
Japan

Yong Wan Ju,
Korea

Qian Hualin,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Geoff Huston,
Australia

 

2004

MAEMURA Akinori ,
Japan

Yong Wan Ju,
Korea

Qian Hualin,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Vinh Ngo,
Australia

 

2005

MAEMURA Akinori ,
Japan

Moo-Ho Billy Cheon,
Korea

Qian Hualin,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Vinh Ngo,
Australia

 

2006

MAEMURA Akinori ,
Japan

Moo-Ho Billy Cheon,
Korea

Qian Hualin,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Vinh Ngo,
Australia

 

2007

MAEMURA Akinori ,
 Japan

Kusumba Sridhar,
India

Wei Mao,
China

Vinh Ngo,
Australia

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Ming-Cheng Liang,
Taiwan

Paul Wilson,
Australia

2008

MAEMURA Akinori,
Japan

Kusumba Sridhar,
India

Wei Mao,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

Ming-Cheng Liang,
Taiwan

Paul Wilson,
Australia

2009

MAEMURA Akinori,
Japan

Hyun-Joon Kwon,
Korea

Jian Zhang,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

James Spenceley,
Australia

Paul Wilson,
Australia

2010

MAEMURA Akinori,
Japan

Hyun-Joon Kwon,
Korea

Jian Zhang,
China

Ma Yan,
China

Che-Hoo Cheng,
Hong Kong

Kuo-Wei Wu,
Taiwan

James Spenceley,
Australia

Paul Wilson,
Australia

 

  

The table is obvious on many unspoken but visibly glaring aspects which, coupled with certain important excerpts of the by-laws reproduced below, will help in understanding the areas of concern as well as the way forward for the esteemed APNIC-TALK group: 

 

The Executive Council:

·       .....the Executive Council shall be composed of seven members elected at AGMs in accordance with the provisions of by-laws.

·      Executive Council members shall serve on the Executive Council in their personal capacity and shall act in the best interests of the APNIC membership and not the Member organisation to which that individual belongs. Only one individual per Member organisation may be elected to sit on the Executive Council.

 

Quorum

·       A meeting of the Executive Council is duly constituted for all purposes if at the commencement of the meeting there are present in person not less than one half of the total number of Council members or their duly authorised representatives.

 

EC Confidentiality             

  

·       All business undertaken by the EC is confidential to the EC.

·       All EC members are requested to execute a formal non-disclosure undertaking with APNIC

·       EC members should respect this confidentiality by:

 

          –  not recording EC meetings

          –  not inviting other members to participate in, or listen into EC meetings without the prior permission    

               of the Chair of the EC

          –  not circulating EC mail messages to any third party without the express permission of the Chair

             of the EC–not divulging any membership information of which they are aware as an EC member.

 

 

“My motivation is my APNIC. Our APNIC”

 

Regards and best wishes

 

Naresh Ajwani

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

From: Matthew Moyle-Croft [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 11 March 2010 03:40
To: Naresh Ajwani
Cc: APNIC TALK
Subject: Re: [apnic-talk] apnic-talk Digest, Vol 71, Issue 51

 

 

On 11/03/2010, at 1:58 AM, Naresh Ajwani wrote:



 

Dear Mathew,

 

I agree with your suggestions and shall be the responsibility of the independent electoral body constituted at the time of announcement of election.

 

Please don't twist my words.

 

Where's your actual proposal for "an independent electoral body"?   You seem to have assumed acceptance where there is none.  Certainly not from me.

 

This is APNIC, not a country.   The costs and complexity don't appear to give a useful outcome.  

 

 

What is your opinion about the following:

 

1.     Equal voting rights to each member of APNIC

 

As before I think the current resource based arrangement is fine.   Changing to member based in the face of IPv4 exhaustion seems to be a way of stacking the vote by encouraging people to join for no other reason than voting.



2.     Specified terms

 

I don't see the motivation.  Especially when there doesn't appear to be a problem at the moment..   Fixed terms have the problem that they remove often good people for an arbitrary reason.

 

Again, given that you and others are unhappy about the outcome of a just performed election where your candidate didn't get elected  I feel that your motivation for changing the system immediately after is suspect.   I would suggest that you concentrate on not "changing the system" but actually focusing on electing a candidate next time.  Ensuring your proxies are in and that your candidate is well known.   Just having them well known in India is not a reason for others to vote for them.   This is a multinational organisation that requires more from the candidates.

 

A number of people who got elected for instance are people that I've met, talked to and corresponded with - all from different countries from my own.

 

I'm also disappointed that you have, despite demanding change, actually offered no concrete changes other than one line suggestions.

 

All of this I've said before but we're still going in circles.

 

Regards,

Matthew

(Speaking for himself)

 

 



 

Regards and best wishes

 

Naresh Ajwani

 

 

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