Re: [apnic-talk] APNIC EC Election Review Panel
On 13/07/2010, at 10:33 PM, Desi Valli wrote:
> Thanks Terry. This is informative, constructive and productive for a healthy and meaningful discussion. Good to know that there are logical debaters in this forum.
>
> 1. I agree to your point that there shall be a model to ethically parent the NIR members as a membership class in APNIC. In fact there is no intent to discriminate any member, who is direct or indirect. The justifiable reason that I could interpret on your suggestion is, NIR is none but an extended arm of APNIC (like distributors/wholesaler/VAS operators). NIR does nothing but deliver the services of APNIC in a format, that may be a need of the local environment. Henceforth, members of NIR shall be an APNIC member, perhaps under a different class or format. If you have any idea in this line, please propose.
I have ideas, but feel this forum to be the wrong place. If or When a working group in APNIC is formed on the constitutional reform topics then I will participate.
>
> 2. Limited period for ECs; I feel the inputs to be logical and practical. Instead of debarring totally, it shall be a break for a said term. This gives people with different viewpoints apply their strategies in between.
>
>
> 4. Regional EC representation: The following is regional description of APNIC, as shown in the annual report.
I don't see significant differences between sub-regions. I would much prefer to see types of stakeholders having representation, not just from a geographical area.
> 5. Online Voting: The intent of online voting is nothing but to eliminate the proxy-exchange (swap) model that prevails in the election process, which leads to cartel. Let members elect directly who they want to. If that is settled half of the election issues will be settled. Online voting resolves it.
>
Direct that to the election review panel.
>
>
> Desperation made & makes the world to innovate ideas that are unimaginable. To understand this, it’s not appropriate to question what difference it makes to TATA by reducing the cost of IP, but need to ask what made TATA to innovate a 2000$ car. That will answer, what difference it will make to TATA on reducing the cost of IP too.
>
>
>
> PS: Azim premji, chairman of Wipro, personal net-worth - 17 billion USD, travels in Economy.
> Narayanamoorthy, founder of Infosys, still travels in economy
That's nice, but that is their choice.