[arin-discuss] Status of Investigations

Dean Anderson wrote:
> [ARIN agrees that discussion to recall Board members, to conduct
> investigations of ARIN expenditures, and to stop certain ARIN
> expenditures does not violate the ARIN AUP.]

Does it?  Where?

> I am indeed following the bylaws.  An investigation of misconduct needs
> to be completed before we can reasonably ask members to vote on removal
> for cause; Evidence and cause for removal needs to be discussed with the
> membership.  Your demand to "take it off list" is a transparent effort
> to prevent the membership from being informed of misconduct and to
> prevent the membership from consequently being inclined to vote for the
> removal of members of the Board of Directors.

Then specifically state the misconduct with regard to the performance of 
duties as an ARIN trustee.  "He ran a stop sign in 2001, here's a copy 
of the traffic ticket", has nothing whatsoever to do with his present 
performance with regard to ARIN or any misconduct with regards to his 
acts as a Board member.

"I caught him stealing from ARIN as a trustee" would be relevant.  "Some 
lawyer said that his company picked on his client's company and 
convinced a judge to make them stop temporarily, and this was a long 
time ago" wouldn't.  Get it?

> "According to a new entry in the Spamhaus Rokso record for Scott 
> Richter, three "former spamfighters" had been discover on Richter's 
> payroll: former MAPS employees Kelly Molloy (Thompson) and Pete 
> Popovich, as well as Ohio anti-spammer Karen Hoffmann. The Rokso entry 
> ROK2888, stated that the three were employed by Richter to handle 
> network abuse complaints and to perform "listwashing"---the task of 
> removing angry spam recipients from OptInRealBig.com's mailing lists.
>   [...] which represented 'a depressing reversal of ethics'
> "Spam Kings" pg 254, by Brian McWilliams, Orielly (2003)

That's even more far-fetched.  "According to Scott Richter (consider the 
source), three people who used to be his co-workers also ran stop signs 
five or six years ago."  No evidence that he knew of this activity, and 
even if true, no link to his performance as an ARIN trustee.

These "facts" have been available for quite some time, and the time for 
you to bring them up would have been while you were campaigning for the 
board seat against him.  Even if true, none of this is relevant to his 
performance on the ARIN board.  If you're proposing removal for cause, 
state a *relevant* cause.  Don't give us a history lesson.  Many of us 
were active in the spam wars at the time, most of us know how to use a 
search engine, and there are probably O'Reilly books on most of our 
shelves.  Where's the beef?

-- 
Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay at impulse.net
Impulse Internet Service  -  http://www.impulse.net/
Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV