I agree with you on this since the NDA has always been white elephant in the room let members have a look or say on it
regards Barry macharia > On 28 May 2019, at 13:49, Frank Habicht <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear AfriNIC board members, > > reference is made in below email, and also in several other discussion > items regarding AfriNIC and its governance, to an NDA that board members > are to adhere to. > > Can you share the document please? > > I'm convinced that people have seen it before they signed the NDA. > Because they have to read it before they sign it. > So the NDA is shared before coming into effect for any (new) board > member. So I trust the NDA doesn't fall under the NDA, because it is > information that people get before signing the NDA. > > If more good reasons to share it are required: > For arguments' sake, let's assume someone wants to become a board > member, through being a candidate and winning elections: would it not be > fair to share before this process the document that this person would be > required to sign when elected? > > In case this request does not work, I would ask any new board member of > AfriNIC to share the NDA document on social media or public mailing list > before signing it. Before they have to adhere to the NDA. > > It's just more transparency ;-) > > Thanks, > Frank > > > On 28/05/2019 09:13, Owen DeLong wrote: >> Yes, I have to echo what Sander says here… >> >> The topic title is intentionally inflammatory and misleading >> (“Management violation of a contractual obligation”) as if management >> has a contractual obligation to hide public documents from this community? >> >> The document disclosed by Alan to the community was a matter of public >> record. Anyone can obtain it directly from the courts in Mauritius >> independently. There was no reason whatsoever for Alan to consider it >> confidential and the fact that the board would even think such a thing >> was possible, let alone desirable shows just how out of touch the >> majority of the AfriNIC board is with their duties and obligations as a >> board. >> >> I wish to applaud Seun Ojedeji, Habib Youssef, Robert Ford, as the few >> sane voices in the discussion advocating on behalf of AfriNIC members >> and the community. >> >> I wish to particularly call out Serge Ilunga and S. Moonesamy for their >> particularly absurd idea that a CEO or a board member should or could be >> enjoined from disclosing a PUBLIC DOCUMENT to members of the community. >> There is no service to the board and no possibility whatsoever that the >> document is confidential or contains any form of privileged information >> since it is a matter of public record. How can these two board members >> not see that this would be equivalent to faulting the CEO or other board >> members for quoting from the front page of the New York Times about a >> relevant article on the community-discuss list without first clearing it >> with the boar. This is a circus staged purely for the point of abusing >> the community trust and we should not stand for it. >> >> Any member of the board who feels that there is any legitimacy in >> opposing the disclosure of a published piece of public record of >> interest to the community has no business being a board member. It’s >> quite simply a flagrant violation of the trust of the community. >> >> I also want to call attention to the following quote from Mr. Ousmane Ly >> which is not only tautological in nature, but says absolutely nothing: >> >> "OL reiterated that it is important for the AfriNIC officials to >> respect the rules. If the CEO is found in fault, then a sanction may >> be imposed according to the rules. Board members should be >> responsible to the Board and AfriNIC as a whole and not to the group >> nominating him." >> >> Apparently he since the minutes state that he reiterated this >> nonsensical statement, he felt compelled to make it more than once. >> >> Robert Ford’s perfectly logical initial statement on this subject is, >> however, somewhat tempered by his later absurd comment: >> >> "RF agreed that the CEO should have consulted the Chair. It was not >> clear what was the urgency that made the CEO not to await a Board >> approval. " >> >> Perhaps the CEO didn’t so much seek board approval or even chair >> approval as “advised the chair of his intent to publish” which would be >> what I would have expected under the circumstances. There was perhaps no >> urgency, per se, but there was also no reason to delay publication of a >> document which was technically already published in other fora and >> readily available to anyone who wished to obtain it from the courts of >> Mauritius. >> >> From the outside, looking in on this discussion, it appears to me that >> some fraction of the board got all butt-hurt because they weren’t >> allowed to control the timing and content of the release of information >> to the community when there was no valid reason for them to do so. I >> mean really, what possible harm comes from this disclosure? In reality, >> CEO acted in the best interests of all parties… Community, Membership, >> and Board in making a timely and up front direct honest and true >> disclosure of the court documents to the community. >> >> I have to ask what kind of shenanigans or subterfuge those board members >> intended by delaying publication or altering the disclosure? Sunlight is >> the best disinfectant and to me, the only questionable actions here are >> the actions of the board members seeking to limit disclosure to the >> community. >> >> Any board member which would make such a statement as Mr. Vika Mpisane >> did here: >> >> "The Board Chair needs to meet the CEO to make him aware of his >> responsibilities in detail towards the Board, and to appreciate that >> he is accountable to the Board and not to the community members.” >> >> >> Demonstrates not only a lack of understanding of his position as a board >> member, but so thorough a lack of understanding of how the >> accountability of this organization should function that he has, IMHO, >> no business sitting on the board until he can demonstrate that he has >> been sufficiently retrained. The board and the CEO must be accountable >> to the membership and the community. Yes, the CEO must be accountable to >> the board in how he runs the organization, but that does not relieve him >> of his accountability to the membership and the community.. The board is >> kept accountable to the membership by virtue of the election process >> (and by extension to the community as the membership is somewhat >> representative of the community). The CEO is not so directly accountable >> to the community in such a hard way, but should, nonetheless have a >> sense of duty and obligation to work diligently on behalf of the members >> and the community. Indeed, the board and the CEO should look to the >> membership as the final authority in any dispute and the continuing >> attempts by the board to limit disclosures to the community only foment >> further distrust of the board by the community and the membership. >> >> The board and CEO have equal responsibility to act as checks and >> balances of each other with the membership as the final arbiter of any >> dispute. >> >> The true absurdity of this whole proceeding is well summarized by >> Christian Bope in the following two sentences: >> >> * >> >> ● the CEO should have consulted the Board with regards to the >> publication; if it was urgent the CEO should have consulted the Chair; >> >> * >> >> ● the Management has a tendency to send too many documents to the >> Board; unless there is an urgent matter, all documents or decisions >> which require Board approval should be submitted for Board >> discussion at least 14 days prior scheduled Board meeting, >> >> So in one breath he complains that the CEO didn’t send the document to >> the board for approval prior to publication and in the next breath he >> complains that the CEO sends too many documents to the board. >> >> Well, Mr. Bope, which is it? Do you want the CEO to have greater >> autonomy and bother the board less, or do you want to micromanage every >> aspect of the CEO’s actions? >> >> How can a CEO possibly operate effectively when the guidance he receives >> from the board is so thoroughly dysfunctional? >> >> All of this just in topic 1. Now, let us consider topic 2… >> >> Serge Ilunga claims that by disclosing a public document, Seun Ojedeji >> somehow violated the board NDA… I haven’t read this specific NDA, but >> never in my life have I ever been asked to or signed an NDA which >> required me to keep confidential any documis otherwise published and/ >> made public by other independent means that were not a violation of an NDA. >> >> In this case, Seun stands accused of distributing a document which was >> well and truly public before the board received it. It would have been >> impossible for him to violate any reasonable NDA by further disclosing >> it and any claim that he did is so completely absurd that it makes me >> thoroughly question Mr. Ilunga’s qualifications as a member of the board. >> >> There is some reassurance that can be taken in that the board as a whole >> at least realized that Mr. Ilunga’s accusation is baseless and wholly >> without merit. >> >> Indeed, the one and only legitimate item on the agenda was then deferred >> to the next meeting followed by, perhaps, the most absurd question and >> most ridiculous answer in the entire set of minutes: >> >> “The Chair asked the Board whether there is a need to seek SM’s >> consent before the public release of the Court Rulings.” >> >> >> Let me get this straight… The Chair felt compelled to ask the board >> whether or not they needed the consent of a single board member (which I >> see no particular reason to ask this particular board member and there >> is no explanation in the minutes) prior to the public release of a >> document which is ALREADY PUBLIC? How can the board possibly do anything >> before the public release of a document which was, by definition, >> publicly released at the time the board received it? >> >> I would expect the only rational answer that could possibly come to that >> question would be “Uh, that’s kind of absurd since the document is >> already public.” >> >> Nonetheless, the answer from this beloved board? Here you go: >> >> “After discussion, there was no agreement on whether to seek consent.” >> >> >> That’s right, folks… A collective “Uh, we can’t agree.” Unfortunately, >> in yet another triumph of board opaqueness, we aren’t treated to any >> minutes of this discussion that would allow us to identify which board >> members offered a correct answer vs. which ones were still clinging to >> the absurd notion that the document was somehow not already public. To >> make matters worse, the nature of the board NDA probably precludes each >> board member from even disclosing his own view to the community. >> >> So… I hereby encourage the board to take up the question of waiving the >> NDA with respect to this question and ask that each board member >> self-identify as to whether they believe that this public document is >> somehow not yet publicly released. >> >> Thanks for your attention and thanks, Sander for calling this to our >> attention. >> >> Owen >> >>> On May 27, 2019, at 05:49 , Sander Steffann <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I was just reading the board minutes at >>> https://www.afrinic.net/ast/pdf/2019-minutes/20190305-minutes.pdf and >>> I am surprised at the level of micro-management that CEO Alan Barrett >>> has to deal with. In those minutes both Alan and Seun Ojedeji seem to >>> be reprimanded for being open and transparent to this community. The >>> summary of those minutes show how the board has made it explicitly >>> clear that the CEO is to have no responsibility anymore towards this >>> community. >>> >>> Therefore I would like to explicitly and publicly express my gratitude >>> to both Alan and Seun for their efforts to keep this community >>> involved in Afrinic matters in an open and transparent way. I feel >>> this is a strong requirement for keeping Afrinic respected and >>> supported by both its members and its community. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> Sander >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Community-Discuss mailing list >>> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >>> <mailto:[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss >>> <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 >> <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 > <https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss>
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
