> On Jul 9, 2021, at 04:27 , Mike Silber <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Owen > > I was not specifically responding to your comments and in fact I agreed with > several of them. > > Apologies if I did not make it clear.
OK… It wasn’t clear and I missed that, I guess. In any case, no offense taken. We’ve been friends for several years and even though we may disagree from time to time, I know you to be a fellow person of honor who also consistently tries to do right and act in the interests and service of the community. > The board minutes have improved a lot …. but can use a lot more work. The > practice of publishing resolutions prior to the minutes being published is > also a very good practice - though it may not be satisfying to you and > others, as it lacks some of the detail you seem to seek. You get no argument from me on this point. > Thank you for confirming that this issue is directly relevant to you (I > assume as a consultant to Cloud Innovation?). Correct. > Mr Wollner and others have not been as forthright in disclosing their > interests …. leading to speculation. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Wollner is CEO of Africa On Cloud, a service provider in South Africa and a resource member of AFRINIC. > My concern about possible hypocrisy related to this list of questions and the > astroturfing that has succeeded it: > >>>>> Which board members agreed to the meeting on short notice? > > How does Mr Wollner know it was at short notice? It may have been a regular > meeting for all he knows. I suspect this is speculation due to the timing (Court ruled just the day before the board met and took this action). I suppose there is the possibility that the timing was coincidental, but surely it is not unreasonable absent other information to assume that the board acting on July 8 in regards to a court order issued on July 7 represents a very rapid convening of said board. >>>>> 2. Which board members voted in favor of the motion and which against? > > This is never disclosed in minutes. Why is it now relevant but was not a > month or a year ago? It should be disclosed on all motions, IMHO. It was relevant a month and a year ago and I believe i have raised objection to the lack of this information at several open microphone sessions. >>>>> 3. Who tabled and who seconded the motion? > > This will appear in the minutes in due course. Why the need for it to be > provided on an expedited basis? > >>>>> 4. What was the nature and extent of deliberations? > > This will appear in the minutes in due course. Why the need for it to be > provided on an expedited basis? I can’t speak to Paul’s sense of urgency, but given the unprecedented nature of the situation and the severity of the consequences, i can say that I would certainly prefer to know sooner rather than later. >>>>> 5. Why the urgency to act so swiftly after the judge set aside the >>>>> order? > > This may appear in the minutes in due course. The minutes are not uniform in > their level of detail. Why the need for it to be provided on an expedited > basis? Sure. I only hope that AFRINIC will respond with the same sense of urgency and swiftness of action to the latest order from the courts. >>>>> 6. When was the meeting noticed? > > This has not appeared in any minutes to date. Why is it now relevant but was > not a month or a year ago? I suspect this isn’t so much about minutes as about understanding how the meeting was convened and whether proper process was followed in this case of an apparently urgent meeting. >>>>> 7. When did the meeting take place? > > This will appear in the minutes in due course. Why the need for it to be > provided on an expedited basis? Among other things, depending on the timeline, it may be evidence that AFRINIC has acted in bad faith and in anticipation of the court order which had not yet been issued. As such, the community has a clear interest in verifying this information. >>>>> 8. How/where did the meeting take place? > > This will appear in the minutes in due course. Why the need for it to be > provided on an expedited basis? I would suspect the same reasons as 7, above. Certainly any board taking such extraordinary and unprecedented actions so swiftly with such large consequences to a member of the organization should expect additional scrutiny of their process from the community/membership, no? Owen > > Mike > >> On 9 Jul 2021, at 13:08, Owen DeLong <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> It’s not unusual for people to pay more attention when something affects >> them. >> >> If you will review the record, you will easily find that I was one of the >> people calling for greater transparency >> and greater board accountability starting many years ago prior to the >> formation of the GC. You will also find >> that I was one of the most vocal proponents of the idea of publishing the >> board minutes and that I had >> little sympathy for the board’s claim that there was a need for a lengthy >> review and redaction process >> prior to publication of the old minutes. >> >> I admit I haven’t reviewed the board minutes until now as I’ve not >> encountered a prior situation where >> they are directly relevant to what I was doing, so I was unaware of the >> generally poor quality that you >> report here. >> >> Nonetheless, this is (at least for my part) a genuine desire to know what >> happened and how. >> >> Claiming that it is an attempt to intimidate (how?) strikes me as absurd. >> >> Claiming that it is an attempt to obstruct strikes me as quite a stretch and >> a bit of fear mongering. >> >> If the board is intimidated by a mere question about how they voted and a >> request for some notes >> about their deliberations, then I seriously question their ability to do the >> job of board members. >> My expectation is that this is not the case and that there should be no >> issue getting the answers >> to the questions asked, which you have already agreed should generally be >> published for all >> board meetings. >> >> Owen >> >> > _______________________________________________ > 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
