[arin-discuss] Are we going to vote on this ?

>-----Original Message-----
>From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net
>[mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of Dean Anderson
>Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 1:16 PM
>To: Keith W. Hare
>Cc: arin-discuss at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] Are we going to vote on this ?
>


>The dispute is
>whether these activities qualify as "educational outreach".
>

correct.

>My
>claims are well-founded in objective facts.
>

No they are not.  Your claims are based on an INTERPRETATION of 
objective facts.  ie:  It is an objective fact ARIN was at VON.
It is a subjective interpretation that VON doesen't meeet the
criteria of educational outreach.

You don't believe it does, and I may not even believe it does.
But, if the managers at ARIN can make a reasonable argument that
shows that VON attendance did meet the criteria of educational
outreach, and did in fact produce tangible results towards that
goal, then it makes no difference what we believe, and in
fact we are foolish to continue believing otherwise in the face
of a logical and reasonable argument and tangible results.

This is why I reject the idea that marketing activities are these
ethereal things that just fly around and cannot be measured.  This
is naieve, companies have spent billions of dollars over the
years figuring out how to measure the effects of marketing campaigns.
ARIN's attendance at VON is no different than any other companies
sales and marketing efforts, it can be measured as to it's educational
effectiveness and it SHOULD be measured, as should any other
educational outreach efforts that ARIN makes.

If a particular educational outreach effort - such as attendance at
VON - is measured and found to have no results, then ARIN should
cease doing it and devote the money to other educational efforts
that HAVE results.

I really don't understand why this concept is so difficult for
non-profit organizations to understand, but I see this in church
mission outreach programs all of the time.  I guess some people
just get so caught up in the idea of spending other peoples money
on doing good deeds, that they lose sight of the fact that if
the good deeds don't really make any long term difference then
they are taking money and resources away from good deeds that WOULD
make a difference.

Kind of like the graffiti removal programs that waste a thousand
bucks painting over graffitti on condemmed buildings scheduled for
demolition.

Ted