[arin-discuss] voting

>-----Original Message-----
>From: arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net
>[mailto:arin-discuss-bounces at arin.net]On Behalf Of Paul Vixie
>Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 11:44 AM
>To: arin-discuss at arin.net
>Subject: Re: [arin-discuss] voting
>
>
>today is an election day in my state, and so, the following caught my eye:
>
>> I did not vote. Ergo. I abstained.
>> All those like me also abstained.
>
>i wish that you would vote, and that all others like you would vote.  not
>just in today's election (if your state is having one), and in the next
>ARIN election, but in all elections where you are eligible.
>
>> ... I cannot make an informed decision about who to vote for so I do not
>> vote.  I could throw darts at the ballot and pick that way but
>that seems a
>> little silly to me.  In life we all must pick the things we will
>be active
>> in and the things we will be passive in.  At times those decisions and
>> reasons change but while I am passive in ARIN I will not be voting.  So I
>> abstain.
>
>is there any way ARIN can augment or restructure the election
>process to give
>you more information about the candidates and issues, and lower
>the apparent
>bar to your informed participation?
>

Paul I'll respond to this for myself.

There's 2 things I look for with these types of elections.

The first is if the candidate is trustworthy.  I don't think that for
the ARIN board elections that this is really much of an issue - I think
everyone I've seen up for election is trustworthy, they all work
in the industry, all know what they are doing, etc.

The second thing I look for is what the cadidate's opinions or
position on "the controversial issues" is.  This here is where I think
the problem is.

First I don't think that ARIN really does as good a job listing out
the controversial issues.  For example, what are we going to do about
IPv6?  There is plenty of controversy there in how best to transition to
it.  ARIN's position is that it's a member's problem.  Fine.  Well, I
think the least that ARIN could do is synthesize (from the list if
nowhere else) what the different paths to IPv6 transition are and outline
them for the membership.  Instead, all ARIN has done is vote to do more
education which is a very non-specific response.

Other controversial issues are fees charged to address holders (or the
lack thereof) the privacy vs societies need to know on whois records,
what constitutes utilization, etc. etc.  In most instances ARIN simply
punts on these issues back to the membership.  Well the membership is
arguing amongst themselves over these issues, and nobody is even putting
up some signs as to what the arguments are - so people waste endless time
redefining things, and nobody gets anywhere.

ARIN isn't going to be able to SOLVE these issues - but it surely can
DEFINE these issues.

And this then ties into the elections.

If you want to increase election participation then I would suggest doing
this:

ARIN defines a series of issues - controversial or not - that need some
sort of future resolution. The membership can argue all it wants on how
to define these issues, ARIN should ignore this and just stick to trying
to define them.

The candidates for the board each then provide a platform of their
position on these issues.

For example, you were just elected.  What is YOUR position on IPv6?  I
don't really know.  Do you see why I don't feel competent to vote for
or against you?

Ted