On 19 Sep 2016 13:28, "Douglas Onyango" wrote:
>
> Adding any such language would make the Independent Director no
> different from Regional Directors, which would make it cease to be
> unique/relevant.
>
Is there anything unique with any of the independents who have been
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Douglas Onyango
wrote:
> Hi Seun,
>
> However, given the realities on the ground -- like the scenario we had
> during out last election -- I would support making this an
> additional/optional criteria for NomCom to use when enough candidates
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Alan Barrett
wrote:
>
> > On 19 Sep 2016, at 13:08, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> >
>
> Remember that Bylaws changes need a 75% majority. Would adding
> geographical restrictions to the non-geographical seats have
Ok,
We need to stop for a moment and look at reality – not wishful thinking.
Firstly – I am hearing talk of rough consensus – and while consensus is
applicable in many areas, I am far from convinced this is one of them. The
ONLY place consensus has in this regard is to get a vague indication
Hi Seun,
On 19 September 2016 at 12:08, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
> One point I observed has not been captured in the summary (which i also
> suggested), was to limit the Independent Director seat to "at most" one per
> region at any given time. This will address a possible
+1 @Alain
Regards
Arnaud
2016-09-19 19:56 GMT+00:00 ALAIN AINA :
> Hi,
>
> Let’s fix the process and better organise this critical review of the
> bylawsl. I do support the idea of a committee .
>
> —Alain
>
>
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Bope Domilongo Christian <
>
I agree with the sentiments as echoed by Boubakar below.
Thanks
Andrew
From: Mike Silber
Reply-To: General Discussions of AFRINIC
Date: Monday, 19 September 2016 at 10:39
To: General Discussions of AFRINIC
> On 18 Sep 2016, at 23:44, Boubakar Barry wrote:
>
…
> We can of course think of advantages we can give to associate members to
> acknowledge their commitment and support. But I would not support giving
> voting rights to associate members. I would rather be for
Hi,
Let’s fix the process and better organise this critical review of the bylawsl.
I do support the idea of a committee .
—Alain
> On Sep 19, 2016, at 4:25 PM, Bope Domilongo Christian
> wrote:
>
> Dear CEO,
>
> [speaking as a member of the community]
>
>
+1 to Frank.
The PRIMARY value to Associate members should be reflected in the association
with Afrinic and not Voting.
The PRIMARY value to resource members are the resources from Afrinic.
rgds
-
Eng. Abibu R.
10 matches
Mail list logo