On 10 Sep 2025, at 12:43, Amin Dayekh wrote:
The very framing of the question *“should AFRINIC relocate, and to which country?”* at a time when the Registry was under severe legal and institutional pressure, created the impression of a community-driven mandate that did not truly exist.
as i said: “ .. can not happen without buy-in from afrinic’s membership” regardless of how any part of that discussion may have been interpreted; that truth still holds.
maybe, we just interpret people, and events differently. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Moreover, in this election a segment of our membership cannot even vote, because of earlier court orders. Would it not have been more strategic, [..]
perfect is the enemy of complete. there are many parts of this election that many people would have liked to see be done differently. you might see value in rehashing those - but, since we’re in the middle of an election where, we’ve ostensibly been able to get valid voters registered to vote, and there’s more than 170 votes cast (which is already better than most afrinic elections) - i don’t.
Perhaps the most responsible course now is to allow the new Board to settle and to concentrate on repairing governance, protecting the membership, and restoring trust in the Registry. That is where the community’s strength lies.
in this, we agree. (still noting that disagreement and debate is important to build a better system :-))
And finally, without any sense of discrimination but as a simple observation, I do find it striking that the call for “new blood” is directed at some, while at the same time, very familiar old faces continue to appear on the same lists. Renewal is important, but it must be genuine, not selective.
equally, i did not propose a single token criterion. i suggested several, each of them relevant. choosing to highlight only one, whilst ignoring the others is a deliberate narrowing of the discussion, and weakens your own case. careful that you don’t advocate bias, wrapped up in principle ..
—n.