It also worries me that people seem to restrict what OTHERS say.
If Owen feels like he wishes to comment on something – he is as free to do so
as anyone here is free to say anything.
Why do you wish to censor some members of the community? If you don’t like
what they say – feel free to ignore it.
It’s the same way it annoys me when people come to the floor in a PDP meeting
and go “I THINK THIS DISCUSSION SHOULD END AND THIS POLICY SHOULD BE SCRAPPED
And “WHY ARE WE ENTERTAINING THIS POLICY IT HAS HAD NO COMMENTS SO ITS NOT
Ignoring the process that specifically lays out a way things are supposed to go.
Here is a big hint – don’t like something, you’re free to ignore it, or, in
this case, free to bitch and whine about it – but honestly, whining about
things because you don’t like what someone says without adding anything
constructive to the debate just indicates a level of insecurity and is pretty
And well – that’s me exercising my freedom of speech and if you don’t what I’ve
said here, you’re free to ignore it, or whine some more, not like it makes a
difference to me.
From: Omo Oaiya [mailto:omo.oa...@wacren.net]
Sent: 16 September 2016 12:48
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment
On 16 Sep 2016, at 10:39, Jackson Muthili
2 I feel too that Owen speaks too often for Alan. He is free to do so;
Alan is free to not speak up as he wish. It is a free world.
however raise eyebrows on intent of Owen with some people to
paraphrase his action as shielding CEO.
++1 …and others wonder why Owen repeatedly sees the need to when it is
unsolicited or even unnecessary most times.
Community-Discuss mailing list