Hi Ole:

Owen has explained the litigation clause in a much better English than I do.

I would rather EC not even consider to table such resolution.



On Mon, 21 Aug 2023 at 22:12 Ole Jacobsen <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Cutting this down considerably to improve readability:
>
> You said:
>
> Yes, RIR is owned by its members, and it’s member have rights to challenge
> the RIR, including their legal rights.
>
> That does not preclude their ability participate in the governance
> matters, including running for the election.
>
> ***OLE: Well, that is what is being proposed in the bylaw changes and the
> obvious conflict of interest it would
> create for a candidate to be simultaneously running for the EC and suing
> APNIC is a good reason IMO. This is entirely
> separate from member's rights to "challenge the RIR."
>
>>
> Public none profit company works for the collective good of humans, of
> course it’s leadership are held at much higher standard of accountability
> towards society, especially it’s members.
>
> ***OLE: s/good of humans/good of its members or constituency/ and I would
> agree which is *precisely* why the litigation
> issue is even on the table.
>
> APNIC have been a one man company for 25 years, it’s a public fact, and it
> never register as NGO with Australian goverment.
>
> ***OLE: It's also a red herring since APNIC has a well-established
> governance structure. And this particular *legal*
> directorship situation is being corrected with the new bylaws where it
> will no longer be a "one man company".
>
> Court have declared all my lawsuits are justified, it is afrinic not
> afforded due process to me, unless you can sustain your claim I have made
> frivolous lawsuits, you have to bare the consequences of deformation.
>
> ***OLE: I am obviously talking about what is *alleged* in the letter you
> yourself linked to. I am not a lawyer, but
> it would seem to me that your lawsuit has resulted in an important
> organization being effectively shut down. Perhaps
> that's not "frivolous," but it seems to me to be at least heavy-handed at
> a minimum.
>
> That being said, it does not mean elected EC will not use APNIC as device
> to silence the opposition, history told us every elected dictatorship
> including hitler did that.
>
> ***OLE: Godwin's Law applies, congratulations! I think it only took you 3
> rounds.
>
> Who said those IP intent to use anywhere? Can you sustain your claim with
> actual document?
>
> RIR are local internet facilitator, not territorial exclusive governing
> body.
>
> ***OLE: See above "alleged" as the letter from AFRINIC states that you
> linked to. RIRs are "Regional."
>
> Most people understand by-law change required to give true power back to
> the members.
>
> Again, *you* are not most people in the list.
>
> ***OLE: Right, and thankfully neither are *you* !
>
>
> Ole J. Jacobsen
> Editor and Publisher
> The Internet Protocol Journal
> Office: +1 415-550-9433
> Cell:   +1 415-370-4628
> Docomo: +81 90 3337-9311
> Web: protocoljournal.org
> E-mail: [email protected]
> E-mail: [email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
--
Kind regards.
Lu
_______________________________________________
APNIC-talk - https://mailman.apnic.net/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to