On 7 June 2018 at 15:16, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > The result is not broken. The guidelines need to be improved to avoid the > potential for the proposed alternate and illogical conclusion and provide > greater clarity. >
I marvel at your logic. The result was derived form same guidelines that have potential for illogical conclusion and insufficient clarity yet it is not broken? > > That can be achieved without further answers from board, legal, or CEO. I > realize that doesn’t provide the outcome that those who proposed this > illogical (albeit literal) alternative interpretation were hoping for, but > it is the only rational outcome. > I think you let the board, legal or CEO respond to this before AFRINIC is subjected to unneccessary legal exposure Omo > Owen > > > On Jun 7, 2018, at 06:34, Noah <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, 12:44 p.m. Ben Roberts, <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> But isn’t this an academic discussion? >> >> I’m not seeing any of the candidates that were rejected by majority by >> the members raising any requests to appeal? >> > > > We have major issues that need answers in order to fix the flaws that are > apparently being avoided by those tasked with answers. > > If the board or the CEO or the legal counsel dodges answering some of this > questions then how shall we fix what is clearly broken. > > Noah > >> > _______________________________________________ > 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
