Personally, I think that we should simply eliminate the geographic restrictions on board seats and have a single AfriNIC board elected from qualified candidates from within the region, regardless of where in the region they come from.
Owen > On Jun 16, 2019, at 4:39 AM, Dewole Ajao <[email protected]> wrote: > > Since we are on the topic of "reforming" NomCom, I wonder why our bylaws > state that candidates for appointment to NomCom shall *not* be domiciled in a > region where an open seat is being contested. I think a person resident > within a region is more likely to know and have access to suitably qualified > candidates and we should remove this restriction as we try to improve the > nomination. > > If the sole intention of this restriction was to prevent favoritism/bias, I > think adding transparency to the process will quite easily expose such. Or is > anyone aware of other justifications for having that restriction in place? > > Dewole. > > On 6/16/2019 11:54 AM, John Walu wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:31 PM Owen DeLong <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >>> >> In general, I agree with you. I will, however, note that it is possible that >> there are situations where “why” should be redacted to protect the >> confidentiality and dignity of the applicant who was rejected. For example, >> if the nominating committee had rejected a candidate because he is under >> indictment and under disciplinary review in his day job for misconduct, I >> don’t think that nomcom should be the ones to publicly disclose those >> details. >> >>> >> @Owen >> >> Its true, we must protect the applicant's privacy. However, we must also >> enhance the Nomcom's transparency. Imagine a situation where Nomcomm >> disqualifies candidates because they allegedly did not respond to some >> email. It is quite difficult really to really prove beyond reasonable it at >> all such an email was ever sent. It is even harder to prove that it was >> successfully delivered to the intended recipient. >> >> In such a case, Nomcom should publicly say Candidate X was disqualified >> because they did not respond to an email. (that in itself will discourage >> and expose a Nomcom that is heavily biased towards knocking out, rather >> than recruiting board members;-) >> >> Perhaps a middle ground that would protect the candidate's privacy while >> enhancing Nomcom Transparency and accountability would be to seek consent or >> objection from Candidates - at the point of application - if they would >> object to the reasons behind their rejection being publicly reported. >> >> That way we avoid giving a blank cheque to Nomcom who may make decisions >> knowing very well that they need NOT explain themselves to anyone (lack of >> accountability). >> >> So lets design and give Nomcomm a Standard Reporting Template to enhance >> their transparency. They will remain independent and autonomous in the >> functionality, but they should owe the community an understanding on how >> they worked hard to raise good candidates for AfriNIC. >> >> The report from Nomcomm with respect to the PDWG election is a good start >> and can be refined and adapted for future Nomcomms. >> >> walu. >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 15, 2019 at 1:31 PM Owen DeLong <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >> > On Jun 4, 2019, at 11:34 PM, John Walu <[email protected] >> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> > >> > I believe the deeper question is WHY is there an increasingly smaller >> > candidate slate of those volunteering to serve on Afrinic board, year in >> > year out. >> > >> > Two possible answers: >> > A) Good candidates are avoiding the perceived 'challenging' board >> > /management /community relationships that continue to persist. So nomcom >> > hands are tied and cannot manufacture candidates. >> > >> > OR >> > B) There are actually many good candidates applying BUT the Nomcom >> > 'Black-box' processes is kicking them out and reducing them to 1 or 2 >> > nominees. >> > >> > To drill down to the correct answer, I think the Nomcom process needs to >> > be reformed. >> > >> > I still do not understand the benefit of having a black box process in the >> > nomination committee where the community has no clue about how many >> > candidates applied, how many got knocked out and why. IF national >> > Presidential election systems are so open about this, why is that it has >> > to remain hidden for Afrinic? >> > >> > And I say this as someone who has once served on Nomcomm as well as >> > someone who has once been rejected by some previous Nomcomm (I want to >> > believe it is within my right to share personal information/experience as >> > this is not covered under NDA, but I stand to be corrected ;-) >> > >> > At a minimum, we should request that as Nomcom publishes the candidate >> > slate, they should also show a tally (without the names) of how many >> > candidates applied, how many got kicked out, why they were kicked out and >> > how many successfully went thro. >> >> In general, I agree with you. I will, however, note that it is possible that >> there are situations where “why” should be redacted to protect the >> confidentiality and dignity of the applicant who was rejected. For example, >> if the nominating committee had rejected a candidate because he is under >> indictment and under disciplinary review in his day job for misconduct, I >> don’t think that nomcom should be the ones to publicly disclose those >> details. >> >> > I believe this information can shed some light on the deeper question >> > above of whether indeed we have fewer applicants or our black-box nommcom >> > process is simply kicking them out in order to eventually present a single >> > candidate. >> >> My suspicion is that to some degree, both are occurring. >> >> Owen >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
