Hi Owen

Apologies for top-posting …. but this thread is getting over-long.

I suspect your suppositions are all correct.

If they are indeed all correct, then it would appear that Mr Wollner is acting 
as a proxy for CIL and the questions he raised would be more appropriately 
raised by CIL - either on this list or before a court? These are NOT general 
questions or comments about AfriNIC governance (which I will be happy to 
debate) but rather very specific to the current issue.

So, to me this looks like more astroturfing.

Mike

> On 13 Jul 2021, at 18:55, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jul 9, 2021, at 04:27 , Mike Silber <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[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?
> 

_______________________________________________
Community-Discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss

Reply via email to