I did not imply anything against Australians. sorry if my english means that way. apnic is for asia pacific it should hv equal representation from the region it manages. a few individuals with same location and thinking is not good for apnic as they do not hv an understanding of all sub regions. world is changing and so apnic should.
There are a number of high professionals in our side of the world who can qualify for such positions. why bring people from outside and make them look after us when they do not have any idea of how we do business.
apnic must provide opportunity for professionals from our region too not just from Australia or other rirs. such positions must be advertised across the region and sub regions to fine a person who fits in our region and knows our region and us. I think this is a fair comment.
rgrds
Sameer
On Fri, 09 Jul 2010 13:05:37 +0530 wrote
>
On 09/07/2010, at 4:37 PM, Desi Valli wrote:
> I'm not from a native English speaking country. However, what I can interpret from few of the conversations is that no one is accusing anyone of misappropriation, but of mismanagement. In any corporate, not all mismanagement happens due to rubbing hands or connivance with senior members. But also happens due to incapability and inefficiency, which is non-intentional in nature. The purpose of few highlights seem to be of mismanagement and not of misappropriation.
>
> I don’t see any need of evidence more than the annual report. The total spent on grant, meetings & trainings that are considered to be the benefits for members, is only 2.3%, where as operation/admin/general expenses constitutes 97.7%.
Maybe APNIC just needs to rearrange the numbers - ie. if travel/organisation/staff time etc is used for grant, meetings & trainings then it presents that as a "cost of meeting".
You might find that the numbers skew very differently.
I'm quite disappointed that a particular contingent here appears, after having not succeeded in being voted into the EC to basically accuse everyone else of mismanagement, misappropriation, incompetence etc and wanting to change the voting system as well as add gerrymandering. Not to mention people implying directly that APNIC is like this because it's run by Australians.