OK, I understand your perspective as well as Alex's, and think both have some validity.

From: McTim [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2012 10:58 AM
To: Milton L Mueller
Cc: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: [council] A New Approach to Africa

Milton,
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Well said, Alex.


It's NOT particularly well said actually, as the AfriNIC BoD is NOT the policy making table, they simplly affirm that the policy making process (PDP) was followed when they ratify a new policy.

PLUS, the AfriNIC BoD (and staff) have nothing to do with the AfrICANN community way of working, they are chalk and cheese.  One simply provides a server/mailing list software and bandwidth for the other.

In addition, SGs are not meant to be represented.  Is this what you want fixed?


Can this be fixed?


Sure, bylaws can be changed.  What exactly do you want fixed?   given the regional politics involved in forming AfriNIC in the first place, i doubt you will get much traction on changing regional representation with stakeholder grouping representation, but you can try.

Why you would want to escapes me, but knock yourselves out!


--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel



From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of Alex Gakuru

Mailing lists can/are open but effective policy influence is achieved with representation on the policy making table. Their 6-person BOD structure http://www.afrinic.net/en/our-structure/bod  of Eastern Africa(1), Indian Ocean(1), Northern Africa(1), Western Africa(1), Central Africa(1), Southern Africa(1) are business, ccTLDs and government persons. It does not provide for civil society representatives. Or would I be missing one (including on the listed past) BOD members?