Yes as the Christians often joke: “For God so loved the World that he didn’t send a
committee”. ...Skeeve -- Skeeve Stevens, CEO/Technical Director eintellego Pty Ltd - The Networking Specialists skeeve at eintellego dot net / www.eintellego.net Phone: 1300 753 383, Fax: (+612) 8572 9954 Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve www.linkedin.com/in/skeeve ; facebook.com/eintellego -- NOC, NOC, who's there? From: apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net
[mailto:apnic-talk-bounces at lists dot apnic dot net] On Behalf Of Matthew
Moyle-Croft On 29/07/2010, at 2:34 PM, Rajesh Chharia wrote:
Rome was not built in a day.......... Nor by committee. MMC
Regards Rajesh On 29-Jul-10, at 09:24 AM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
You're suggesting all the governments in the region have a
committee to advise APNIC? Do you expect anything to happen? MMC On 29/07/2010, at 12:33 PM, Rajesh Chharia wrote:
Dear MM, GAC stand for Government Advisory Committee. In Internet all
stake holders that includes Government are important for its success. The Eco
System in ICANN is also on the same line. To be NIR its mandatory to endorse
the application from sovereign. In brief why not we have them as a committee.
It will also help us in our demand for giving equal representation to all
economies in Apnic. Vested Interest..I had observed few members deviating the
healthy debates/discussion to either racial or showing solidarity to
individuals with an intent to please people. Te debate on reforms is purely and
purely in the interest of Apnic. I don't want any ambiguity either in MoA or
rules and regulation. If the foundation is not correct how one can expect the
right results. I suggest check few ID's who diverted the discussions/debate to
such said concerns. I welcome all to debate and convince Apnic to ponder on the
following area of concerns:
Regards Rajesh On 28-Jul-10, at 16:09 PM, Matthew Moyle-Croft wrote:
Rajesh, Can you clarify what you mean by "vest
interested"? Also, what do you mean by "GAC"? MMC On 28/07/2010, at 5:35 PM, Rajesh Chharia wrote:
Dear Jonny, Thanks for clarifying your view points. I also feel that
there is change/amendment required in MoA. The community with 52 economies
would keep getting interfered by vested interest, I promise to make them
visible. My 5th proposal is "Reform of MoA"
in addition to following 4 reforms proposed earlier: 1.
Independent Election Panel. 2.
Abolish proportionate Voting. 3.
Time lines for EC's 4.
GAC should be incorporated & Representation of all Economies. Regards Rajesh PS:
I hope you are not referring about Vote Management you discuss with us in last
APNIC 29. On 28-Jul-10, at 13:10 PM, Jonny Martin wrote:
Rajesh, Overlooking any personal remark, let me respond to
Johny’s explanation on behalf of Paul.
|