Hi JJ,
Weighted voting in APNIC can't inadvertently concentrate (and has not
concentrated) power within a select few tiers, as I've demonstrated previously.
The only way that I see this occurring is if significant resource holding
shifts were to take place, which I don't see happening anytime
Hi Christopher,
While the concern of potential manipulation in a "One Member, One Vote" system
is valid, it's important to acknowledge that no voting model is entirely immune
to exploitation. The current tier-based approach, while seemingly protective
against large-scale influence, can
Hello Vivian,
While yes, it might take effort to convince 44 members to get 1408 votes,
moving to a "one member one vote" system will also make it easier to exploit
the voting rights of members with lower resource holdings. To refer to David's
e-mail from earlier today, it would also allow for
Hi Christopher,
While I agree with you on the maths, we need to also think of how it works
in reality. The problem of the current voting system is that it makes it
much easier for some to get votes by focusing on a few organizations.
To get 1408 votes, let's say, will take the effort to convince
Just to clarify a point in this reply:
I cannot speak as to whether or not someone how or possibly could access the
voters' roll, as I don't know what safeguards are in place to protect this
information. Having said this, I doubt this took place as I was the voter for a
member, and received no
Hubert,
Let's say that I was privy to the number of registered members and their
membership tiers at the time , this does not mean that "the community should be
in fear that APNIC database security was compromised". There are avenues for
obtaining such information through legitimate methods,
Hi Hubert,
As a point of data for you,
We hadn't previously voted before but did this time to ensure that Larus did
not stack the EC.
I am looking forward to voting in the proposed protections to APNIC and I think
it is very important that they occur.
Thanks,
Michael.
Hi David/Barry,
“These objectives are included in the By-laws that govern the role of APNIC and
the APNIC Secretariat.
To:
Provide Internet resource allocation and registration services to enable
communications via open system network protocols and to assist in the
development and growth of
Dear Mr. Hawker,
It is good that you cleared the air by confirming you have not been made privy
to such raw data, or else the community should be in fear that APNIC database
security was compromised.
Seriously, does referencing style matter in a public forum which is set up to
spark
> On Aug 16, 2023, at 14:30, Christopher Hawker wrote:
>
> As of 16:30 AEST on 02 March 2023 (when the APNIC 55 EC Election polls
> closed), there were 33,247 votes cast[1]. As of yesterday, there were a total
> of 35004 possible votes based on the number of registered members. Based on
>
> On Aug 16, 2023, at 13:37, David Conrad wrote:
>
> Do you believe (say) an individual associate member that does not provide
> Internet service should have equal voting power related to IP address
> allocation policies as (say) China Telecom which provides Internet service to
> tens of
> On Aug 16, 2023, at 12:51, Fraser McGlinn wrote:
>
> It would be great if you can leave the skeptics at the door, and actually do
> some research before spreading misinformation.
@Fraser … you means people should be doing their RTFM? :-)
Given the bullying behavior, I would be shocked if
> On Aug 16, 2023, at 10:40, tommy...@8lian.cn wrote:
>
> The current voting mechanism is inherently unfair, as it allows large-sized
> members to potentially dominate the vote, leaving smaller members like us
> without a fair chance to compete under such circumstances.
>
> It is illogical
Hubert,
Unfortunately, I'm not privy to the exact number of registered members at the
time the polls closed, so I need to make some educated assumptions.
As of 16:30 AEST on 02 March 2023 (when the APNIC 55 EC Election polls closed),
there were 33,247 votes cast[1]. As of yesterday, there were
On Aug 15, 2023, at 4:20 AM, tommy...@8lian.cn wrote:
> I completely agree that every member, regardless of their resources, should
> have equal voting power.
> The current voting mechanism is inherently unfair, as it allows large-sized
> members to potentially dominate the vote, leaving
Dear Mr. Hawker,
As conveyed to Mr. McGlinn earlier, I understood that those data is publicly
available but that is not the raw data I mentioned. APNIC, as the only entity
with the actual voter- rolls (i.e. lists of names and addresses of all the
actual people registered to exercise the
Hubert,
How can one refer to voting behaviours and patterns of members without this
information being made public? What's the source of your "raw data"? I'm sure
you can understand and appreciate the need to substantiate and back statements
with correct data sources.
Regards,
Christopher H.
Hi,
This is public information, and not very difficult to find.
https://www.apnic.net/about-apnic/organization/structure/members/
https://www.apnic.net/community/participate/elections/ec/voting/how-many-votes/
The stats that were provided by Christopher were based on total member count,
not
Dear Mr. McGlinn,
Thank you for your information but both the links have already been provided by
Mr. Hawker in his previous postings, and I too have read them and even
dissected the annual reports but none of them details the actual voters turnout
rate for each membership tiers. The raw
Hubert,
The data that I obtained can be found at
https://www.apnic.net/about-apnic/organization/structure/members/ and
https://www.apnic.net/about-apnic/corporate-documents/documents/membership/tiers-and-voting-rights/,
not "held in secrecy by APNIC's back-end staffs", rather it is publicly
I agree with mr Lu Heng
On Tue, Aug 15, 2023, 2:10 PM Lu Heng wrote:
> Hi Colleagues:
>
> Just like in the United nation, a country big or small always gets the
> same voting power.
>
> We believe in diversity of membership and have members' voices heard, big
> or small.
>
> So I advocate EC
Hi,I completely agree that every member, regardless of their resources, should have equal voting power. The current voting mechanism is inherently unfair, as it allows large-sized members to potentially dominate the vote, leaving smaller members like us without a fair chance to compete under such
> We get it, you all for current in power ones send out communications not for
> any opposition to send out communications.
>
> If that is not for dictatorship I really don’t know what is.
This is illustration to me that you have a problem understanding what people
are trying to communicate
Dear Mr. Hawker,
I will start this off by stating how impressed I am that you seem to be able to
glean into the raw data which is presumably held in secrecy by APNIC's back-end
staffs, by knowing the exact breakdown of (up to actual count) that the total
numbers of members from each tiers
Hi Chris:
We get it, you all for current in power ones send out communications not
for any opposition to send out communications.
If that is not for dictatorship I really don’t know what is.
On Tue, 15 Aug 2023 at 20:09 Christopher Hawker
wrote:
> I don’t see a reason for APNIC to maintain
I don’t see a reason for APNIC to maintain governance contacts. They already
have contact information usable to contact members about their membership.
Using Australian politics, you don’t see it mandated that the Australian
Electoral Commission maintain a list of every member of voting age for
Hi Chris:
I have not tell any lie, and ready to testify any of my statement in an
open court, but I don’t believe you can.
Statement like I responsible for AFRINIC problem is laughable, I did not
ask AFRINIC management steal IP address, I did not ask their board of
director sexually harass it’s
Lu,
Your comments in your previous email are nothing short of a joke. You have also
blatantly lied (from my count) 13 times.
If you can quote, word for word and character for character, where I said
everything you’ve mentioned below, I’ll retract my statement. If you cannot,
you have an
Hi Ole:
I suggested a governance contact for APNIC members to receive governance
matters, including election, and I agreed technical contact is not exact
appropriate for such matter, but lack of governance contact, there is a
procedure flaw of communication.
Chris disagree for member to receive
> On Aug 15, 2023, at 06:25, Lu Heng wrote:
4. You said You don't want members to hear the positions of EC candidates and
want to keep them in ignorance.
Just on this point Lu:
I don't think Chris ever said such a thing, since you're into fact checking. He
said (or implied)
that using
Hi Chris:
You said developing country members are accepting brides in elections
without any proof, if that is not questioning the integrity of members I
really don't know what is.
You are the one making many false statements without backing of fact.
You have repeated made yourself clear in
Hello JJ,
I too, do believe in the "One Man, One Vote" principle. It does go a long way
in demonstrating that no matter the person, no matter their status, no matter
their wealth, their values and opinions are just as important as each other.
Regarding the usage of weighted votes in APNIC
Hi Colleagues,
Expanding upon my earlier communication, I am providing clearer picture of the
distinct advantages inherent in the One Member, One Vote system below:
The proposal for "One Member, One Vote" stems from the principles underpinning
"One Man, One Vote," predominantly established
Lu,
I did indeed say that nothing from the Cloud Innovation website can be trusted.
Didn't say that it wasn't true. Anyone who accesses it should not solely rely
on this information and verify it through independent third-party sources.
When you say that I:
1. "discredit people disagree
Hi Colleagues:
Just like in the United nation, a country big or small always gets the same
voting power.
We believe in diversity of membership and have members' voices heard, big
or small.
So I advocate EC consider putting one member one vote into the bylaw
reform, in process towards truly
Hi Chris:
Cloud Innovation website(https://cloudinnovation.org) contains
original court orders, original letter AFRINIC sent to Cloud Innovation
with detailed timelines, yet you claim "nothing in Cloud Innovation website
can be trusted".
The entire argument you have, instead of debating the
36 matches
Mail list logo
