To be honest, I just read the beginning of your email. Many other important things to do.
Just to say: for a resource member who really doesn't care about how AfriNIC is managed/governed and just wants to get its resources (and there is a load of them if you look at meetings attendance and participation in the mailing lists), it makes a huge difference between looking at candidates profiles before logging in to vote and signing a pre-filled form. My last 2 cents on this. Members and the community should decide. B. On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:53 PM, Andrew Alston < [email protected]> wrote: > Speaking in my own personal capacity. > > > > Firstly – You don’t eliminate the risk of bought votes by limiting proxies > – it makes absolutely zero difference – because the person could just as > easily pay someone to vote a particular way electronically. > > > > Secondly – The reason that people give others proxies is often more than > just votes – the voting aspect of it is just another element of the proxy > that can be exercised at the same time. Companies may well want their > voices heard at an AGMM that they cannot be present at – so they issue a > proxy and the individual carrying the proxy then speaks on their behalf * > *AND** votes on their behalf > > > > Thirdly – If we determine that the current wording in the bylaws is > invalid or out of sync with the act or has giant problems with it – the > only way to fix that is to the fix the bylaws – and calling for this to be > fixed won’t help until someone actually proposes new wording to fix the > issue – and then sees if it will get the majority that is required for the > bylaw change. Personally, having read the responses on this list – I do > not see a consensus for a proxy limitation at all – so I have my personal > doubts that such a bylaw change would succeed – but it is still the only > way to actually rectify the problem. (Due to the fact that for all the > reasons I have stated, even if we take the act out of the picture, the > current bylaw limit is in my view invalid since proxies aren’t granted to > members, they are granted to individuals). > > > > Note: I personally will have zero issue if someone attempts to put a > special resolution for anything on the floor – and I would encourage people > who really believe that this is limit SHOULD be there to do exactly that – > attempt to fix the wording in the bylaws such that there is actually a > legitimate limit. I just doubt it would pass a 75% majority based on what > I have seen on this list so far – where I see absolutely no consensus for > such a limit. > > > > Andrew > > > > > > *From: *Boubakar Barry <[email protected]> > *Date: *Tuesday, 4 October 2016 at 22:44 > *To: *Hytham El-Nakhal <[email protected]> > *Cc: *"[email protected]" <[email protected]> > > *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum > > > > In many countries, and not only in Africa, people buy votes and/or vote > differently than instructed. > > By limiting the number of proxies one can carry, we won't eliminate this > risk, but we would at least reduce it. > > I don't understand the logic whereby somebody trusts a third party more > than him/herself? What is the electronic voting facility for? > > Yes, I know some will say everybody should be given the right to vote the > way he/she wants (paper ballot paper onsite, electronic voting or proxy). > No problem with that. > > But let's limit the risks by limiting the number of proxies one eligible > voter can carry. There were good reasons for putting the limit. > > Boubakar > > > > On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Hytham El-Nakhal <[email protected]> > wrote: > > "Talking as a community member in my personal capacity" > > +1 Mark, > I support the freedom for member to choose the way to cast his vote and to > remove the restriction on the total number of proxies that one member can > carry (if 100 members trust one specific member so they all have equal > rights to issue a proxy for him). > I understand that this restriction is applied only for members who has the > right to vote in the meeting as per article 12.12.viii , and not applied on > non-member person who assigned as a proxy by members as per item 12.12.i & > ii & vii the member is free to choose anyone as a proxy, I'm not a lawyer > but just read the articles of AFRINIC bylaws. > > Thanks, > Haitham > ________________________________________ > From: Mark Elkins <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 7:54 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum > > > I don't think the Proxy issue would survive a legal challenge in any > African country based on English (or Dutch) law. > > French law can be different but this is law about how a company operates > and with a few minor exceptions (eg company stamps) - I'd expect this to > be very similar the world over. > > I personally prefer freedom for the individual member to choose the way > in which they want to vote, whether in person, via proxy (without > restrictions) or via electronic voting. > > On 30/09/2016 19:13, Badru Ntege wrote: > > Andrew > > > > On 30 Sep 2016, at 5:30 pm, Andrew Alston > > <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > >> No Omo, > >> > >> > >> > >> Please read what Ashok said – the limitation **WILL NOT SURVIVE LEGAL > >> CHALLENGE** > >> > > > > Afrinic is a regional organisation if we are being shackled by > > jurisdiction of registration we have 52 other jurisdictions. > > > > We have options. Let's remain very open and objective to what is best > > for members. > > > > Consensus not legal shackles is what the Internet is built on. > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> The companies act does not ALLOW the limitation. > >> > >> > >> > >> Andrew > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> *From: *Omo Oaiya <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > >> *Date: *Friday, 30 September 2016 at 17:29 > >> *To: *Andrew Alston <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >> *Cc: *Jean-Robert Hountomey <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>>, "[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum > >> > >> > >> > >> As you have repeated but that is by the way. What is clear is that > >> electronic voting has solved the issue with proxies so we don’t need > >> them. If the companies act is restrictive and does not support better > >> accountability, proxies can be limited to one per member to balance > >> things out. > >> > >> > >> > >> On 30 Sep 2016, at 15:22, Andrew Alston > >> <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> Jean-Robert because proxies are enshrined in the companies act and > >> the act explicitly states that they cannot be removed irrespective > >> of what a company’s bylaws / constitution says. > >> > >> > >> > >> See fifth schedule section 6 > >> > >> > >> > >> Andrew > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> *From: *Jean-Robert Hountomey <[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>> > >> *Date: *Friday, 30 September 2016 at 17:22 > >> *To: *"[email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]>" > >> <[email protected] <mailto:community-discuss@ > afrinic.net>> > >> *Subject: *Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - > quorum > >> > >> > >> > >> Talking about Board Members election (1) and (2), why do we want to > keep Proxies While we have Electronic voting ? > >> > >> Proxies make sens when a member cannot attend the meeting in > person, isn't what we wanted to solve with electronic voting? > >> > >> > >> > >> (1) http://afrinic.net/en/community/elections/bod-election/process > >> > >> (2) http://afrinic.net/en/about/agmm/participate-vote > >> > >> > >> > >> On 9/29/16 8:56 PM, Alan Barrett wrote: > >> > >> On 30 Sep 2016, at 02:26, Mark Elkins <[email protected]> > <mailto:[email protected]> wrote > >> > >> The only time the Proxy Restrictions are enforced is for > the Board > >> > >> elections. Traditionally, the elections for the PDP > Co-Chair is hands at > >> > >> the meeting and the elections for the ASO-AC is by secret > ballot by > >> > >> those present. > >> > >> Proxy restrictions apply to elections by the Members (Resource > Members and Registered Members). ASO-AC and PDWG elections are by the > community or by the PDWG, not by the Members. Board elections and now > Governance Committee elections are by the Members. > >> > >> > >> > >> Alan Barrett > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> > >> Community-Discuss mailing list > >> > >> [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> > >> > >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Community-Discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected] > > > >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> — > >> > >> Omo Oaiya > >> CTO/Directeur Technique, WACREN > >> Mobile: +234 806 4522778, +221 784 305 224 > >> Skype: kodion > >> http://www.wacren.net > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Community-Discuss mailing list > >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > >> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Community-Discuss mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > > > -- > Mark James ELKINS - Posix Systems - (South) Africa > [email protected] Tel: +27.128070590 Cell: +27.826010496 > For fast, reliable, low cost Internet in ZA: https://ftth.posix.co.za > > > _______________________________________________ > Community-Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss > > >
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
