[Community-Discuss] Successful IANA transition

2016-09-30 Thread Alan Barrett
Dear AFRINIC community, It’s now a few minutes after midnight in Washington, DC. The IANA contract between NTIA and ICANN has expired. ICANN is now performing the IANA Numbering Services (assigning IP addresses and ASNs to RIRs, and some related tasks) in terms of a contract between the RIRs

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Frank Habicht
Hi, On 9/30/2016 9:21 PM, Hountomey Jean Robert wrote: >> And will make AfriNIC procedures legal under Mauritius law. > > Great. > > Are we trying to fix a mistake we have all made in the pass ? There is room for misunderstandings, and I don't want any to happen. What action or omission do

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Noah
On 30 Sep 2016 21:23, "Hountomey Jean Robert" wrote: > > > And will make AfriNIC procedures legal under Mauritius law. > > Great. > > Are we trying to fix a mistake we have all made in the pass ? > +1 and this is why we are all openly discussing this issues so that we can

Re: [Community-Discuss] [members-discuss] Matters Arising - Further clarification

2016-09-30 Thread Noah
On 30 Sep 2016 09:20, "Sunday Folayan" wrote: > > Dear Abel, Noah and Members, > > The Board met on 10th August 2016 and I tabled the matter as promised. > > A resolution was voted upon, > Hello Sunday, JB is right. The update on the weblink doesnt show this specific matter

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Mark Elkins
I don't think the Proxy issue would survive a legal challenge in any African country based on English (or Dutch) law. French law can be different but this is law about how a company operates and with a few minor exceptions (eg company stamps) - I'd expect this to be very similar the world over.

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Badru Ntege
As usual we miss the point I think historical reference was mentioned by others and not me. I asked for an open discussion which has happened by other members. My objection is to use legal constraints which goes to limiting options. We are a community of many who are by far wiser than the few

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Badru Ntege
> On 30 Sep 2016, at 7:42 pm, Frank Habicht wrote: > > > On 9/30/2016 5:42 PM, Jean-Robert Hountomey wrote: >>> +1 NO new restrictions on proxies and removing any restriction that >>> currently do exist >> >> Which will take us backward, open the door for further

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Badru Ntege
+1 Badru Ntege CEO NFT Consult Ltd Www.Nftconsult.com “Vision without execution is hallucination.” �D Thomas A. Edison On 30 Sep 2016, at 5:10 pm, Arnaud AMELINA > wrote: Dear CEO, we appreciate your

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Frank Habicht
Hi, On 9/30/2016 5:29 PM, Omo Oaiya wrote: > As you have repeated but that is by the way. What is clear is that > electronic voting has solved the issue with proxies so we don’t need > them. If the companies act is restrictive and does not support better > accountability, proxies can be limited

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Alan Barrett
> On 30 Sep 2016, at 18:29, Omo Oaiya wrote: > > What is clear is that electronic voting has solved the issue with proxies so > we don’t need them. The task of the election committee would be greatly simplified if we did not have proxies and did not have paper votes,

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Alan Barrett
> On 30 Sep 2016, at 18:42, Jean-Robert Hountomey wrote: > >> +1 NO new restrictions on proxies and removing any restriction that >> currently do exist > > Which will take us backward, open the door for further disagreements, add > additional burden on the election

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Alan Barrett
> On 30 Sep 2016, at 18:59, Noah wrote: > > On 30 Sep 2016 15:26, "Alan Barrett" wrote: > > > > Thank you for the advice. I suggest that the limit on pnumber of proxies > > should be removed. > > > > Hi Alan, > > Ok what is going on here > >

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Jean-Robert Hountomey
> +1 NO new restrictions on proxies and removing any restriction that currently > do exist Which will take us backward, open the door for further disagreements, add additional burden on the election committee and require additional controls. Jean-Robert.

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Andrew Alston
Arnaud, Sorry – but speaking as a member, and wearing my Liquid Telecom hat – I must respectfully disagree with you in the strongest terms. It may at times be the CEO’s job to gauge consensus – that does not mean he has to build it. However, in a case such as this – these are bylaw changes –

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Arnaud AMELINA
Dear CEO, we appreciate your contributions and clarification. However we would like to remind you that your position does not allow you to make decisions unilaterally, or to intervene in favor of options or proposals. Good governance require you to remain neutral as you are the one in charge of

Re: [Community-Discuss] Accountability assessment - quorum

2016-09-30 Thread Ashok Radhakissoon
Dear Alan, I am only replying to you on this as I advise the Board only.It is only during an AGMM, when called upon, that i intervene. You are right in stating that the Company's Act takes precedence over the bylaws. I recall that after the Cairo election, the Community felt that bringing a