Re: [apnic-talk] APNIC EC Election Review Panel
On Jul 8, 2010, at 3:19 AM, Sameer Bhagwat wrote:
>> You're accusing the DG of misappropriating funds "for personal luxury"? That's pretty serious. What evidence do you have?
> You are a former APNIC Director General and you are still askign for evidence.
Well, yes. I was DG more than a decade ago. This doesn't give me any special insight into the internal workings of APNIC today, particularly of any alleged misappropriations.
> So as an evidence how about we look at Mr Wilson's travel records for the last ten years or may be travel, accommodation, renumeration?
Typically, accusers have evidence before making public accusations.
> apnic is a membership based not-for-profit business and everything needs to be open to its members.
APNIC is a business and as such, has appropriate confidentiality concerns (e.g., personnel records, proprietary networks plans submitted for justification of requests, etc). While I believe APNIC, as part of the bottom-up address policy definition mechanism, strives for openness and transparency as a component of its legitimacy, I'm curious as to why you believe its status as a not-for-profit demands "everything needs to be open to its members".
> With due respect to Mr Wilson for his last ten years service and for what he has doen to APNIC but David, APNIC is not Mr Wilson's regime and nor it is his gold mine. its time that he step down and make way for fresh blood. enough is enough.
Paul Wilson, as Director General, is the chief executive officer of APNIC and is employed at the discretion of the APNIC Executive Council which is elected by and acts on behalf of the membership. The Executive Council, with a 3/5th majority, can elect to remove the DG if they feel that is appropriate. The membership can, with a 2/3rds majority, amend any EC decision. You seem to believe Paul has acted inappropriately, yet have not explained why other than to insinuate he is traveling inappropriately and/or misappropriating funds (treating APNIC as "his gold mine"). I've gotten no indication that the EC is particularly unhappy with Paul's performance of his duties. What exactly "enough" are you talking about?
> APNIC's business is to distribute and manage ip addresses its not a rocket secience. so why it is costing so much to perform this task that Mr Wilson incresed member fees more than twice now and he might increase it again. Though this fee is neglible compare to the amount we pay for purchaisng equipment still is a cost to our business.
>
> APNIC should be looking at cutting down expneses and cutting down staff numbers rather than increasing the fees. Once again apnic business is distributing and managing ip addresses not managing the world issues travelling around the world in business class with members fees.
Historically, APNIC has performed services requested by its membership and those services included more than simply handing out IP addresses. Providing those services obviously cost money. If the membership feels some services are superfluous, then they should demand those services be cut. Which services do you believe are superfluous?
As for travel policy, it always is controversial, particularly when you aren't the one doing the travel. There is a balance between cost of travel, benefits the travel brings, and the implications on staff. I know when I was DG, about the last thing I wanted to do was get on another airplane, but the role demanded it. It was, in fact, a contributor to my decision to resign. Undoubtedly there can be cost savings by reducing the number of meetings APNIC staff attend or how the staff attends those meetings, but I'll be surprised if there is a massive cost savings.
Regards,
-drc