Since section 12.12 of the bylaws is silent on the issue of whether a proxy is required to be a natural person, then yes, in theory, a body could be a valid proxy. Still any such body would only be entitled to one vote on any matter for which said proxy was appointed, so it would still require that proxy to effectively speak with one voice regardless of the number of natural persons comprising said proxy.
Q1: A RM can appoint one proxy, regardless of the number of natural persons comprising said proxy. Q2: No, a RM cannot have a group of proxies, but they could appoint an entity consisting of multiple natural persons as a proxy as I read the bylaws. Q3: One proxy. There is no apparent limit to the number of natural persons who may comprise the entity appointed as proxy, however. Q4: Section 12.12 of the bylaws governs the appointment of proxies. It does not preclude the appointment of an entity consisting of multiple natural persons as a proxy. Owen > On Jun 7, 2022, at 12:51 , Sylvain Baya <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear PDWG, > Hope this email finds you in good health! > > Please see my comments below, inline... > > Le mardi 7 juin 2022, Owen DeLong <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > a écrit : > IMHO, the term “a representative” could refer to either a natural person > representing a corporation, or a group of natural persons as a representative > body. > > > > Hi Owen, > Thanks for your email, brother! > Please add the comparison effect, before jumping > to a conclusion :-) > > > > > Given that in such ambiguities, it is generally taken to be the most liberal > possible interpretation within reason, I would say the a group of natural > persons as a representative body is valid in this context. > > > > Again! i couldn't agree more, due to the presence > of the other part of that very sentence; you seem > to neglect :-/ > > ...as the comparison is obvious, let me ask you to > answer, first, few simple questions: > > Q1| How many proxies a resource member (RM) > can designate? > > Q2| Is it possible that RM has *a* group of proxies? > > Q3| if the answer of Q2| is yes, then; what is the > max number of proxies for such a group of? > > Q4| i understand it's not sufficient to a resource > member to being represented by only one person, > then; which provision in both the AfriNIC's Bylaws > and/or the MU's Company Act (2001) allow it to > be more than only one's personal expectation? > > > Hope this clarifies something! > > Shalom, > --sb. > > > > > > Owen > > >> On Jun 2, 2022, at 11:09 , Sylvain Baya <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> {remove [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>} >> Dear AfriNIC's Community, >> >> Hope this email finds you in good health! >> >> Thanks to find my comments below, inline... >> >> Le jeudi 2 juin 2022, Owen DeLong via Community-Discuss >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> a >> écrit : >> >> >>> On Jun 1, 2022, at 12:25 , Noah <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, 1 Jun 2022, 22:51 Ish Sookun, <[email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> Hi Noah, >>> >>>> On 1 Jun 2022, at 22:22, Noah <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Part of the above sentence reads ... >>>> >>>> appoint "A" representative…. >>> >>> I understand the “A” and the second word is “representative”. A >>> representative can be a person or a group of persons. >>> >>> Hi Ish >>> >>> English is not my lingo as Swahili was my first language and primary >>> language but I tend to think that the meaning changes depending on how >>> words are contracted together. >>> >>> 1. A representative of.... >>> 2. Representatives of.... >>> 3. Representative >>> 4. Representatives... >>> >>> Do all the above have the same meaning. >>> >> >> It depends on the context, but certainly there is overlap of meaning amongst >> those terms. >> >> [...] >> >> In such a case of ambiguity, especially in a context where, as Andrew >> mentions, legal counsel being present to advise would be potentially >> important, “A representative” should be construed to include whatever >> “representative” the entity deems necessary to constitute “a >> representative”, even if that includes a team of people. >> >> >> >> Hi Owen, >> Thanks for your email, brother. >> >> ...considering the very context, what's your >> understanding of the content of "a" here, please. >> >> Look! the sentence ends with a simple comparison; >> isn't that the key for a common understanding of >> the appropriate content of the word representative? >> >> In other words: find the way *a* proxy is designated, >> then you should be able to know more about the >> first *a*... >> >> Thanks once more! >> >> Shalom, >> --sb. >> >> >> >> >> It would be legitimate to insist that only one of those members of the >> “representative team” do the speaking and voting on behalf of the entire >> representative team, but limiting the online presence only to one >> representative per organization is unreasonable. >> >> Further, there is very long and well established precedence against such a >> restriction. Any change of such magnitude should certainly come with >> sufficient notice for the change to be considered, deliberated, and either >> agreed or rejected by the membership. >> >> Owen >> >> >> [...] >> > > > > -- > Best Regards ! > __ > baya.sylvain[AT cmNOG DOT cm]|<https://cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure > <https://cmnog.cm/dokuwiki/Structure>> > Subscribe to Mailing List: <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/ > <https://lists.cmnog.cm/mailman/listinfo/cmnog/>> > __ > #LASAINTEBIBLE|#Romains15:33«Que LE #DIEU de #Paix soit avec vous > tous! #Amen!» > #MaPrière est que tu naisses de nouveau. #Chrétiennement > «Comme une biche soupire après des courants d’eau, ainsi mon âme soupire > après TOI, ô DIEU!»(#Psaumes42:2) > >
_______________________________________________ Community-Discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo/community-discuss
