[ppml] What do we do with 2002-6?

[Sweeting, John]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Woodcock [mailto:woody at pch.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 28, 2003 3:19 PM
> To: Sweeting, John
> Cc: Bill Darte; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: RE: [ppml] What do we do with 2002-6?
> 
> 
>     > Last call on the mailing list is there to give people 
> that were unable to
>     > attend the meeting to let their opinions be heard.
> 
> Great in theory, except that's not how you folks are using the list.
> A very small number of people on the list, nearly all of whom 
> were also at
> the meeting, are using it, in relative privacy, to countermand the
> decisions of the majority, which were discussed and made 
> publicly, in the
> meeting.  I find that really annoying.  I wouldn't care if it weren't
> making extra work for me, when I already have plenty on my plate.


I agree with you totally on this point. Hopefully, we will get relief with
the new Policy Evaluation Process but I am not sure about that. 


> 
>     > that being said there
>     > was a significant amount of traffic reference this 
> policy with much of it
>     > pertaining to what the public felt were loopholes that 
> could lead to abuse.
> 
> What the public felt we heard and addressed in the meeting.  
> I encourage
> you to compare the numbers.
> 
> We also heard that there had never, in the entire history of 
> the policy,
> been a case of abuse or even attempted abuse.  So we've 
> wasted hours and
> hours and hours in mangling an already-over-long policy still further,
> _for the possibility_ of preventing _hypothetical future waste of a
> few minutes of hostmaster time_.

Again, I agree with you. 


> 
>     > my question is does the rewording of the policy make that much
>     > difference in regards to the other RIRs?
> 
> Of course not...  This re-wording makes it somewhat more 
> cumbersome and
> awkward than the existing policy, but no sane person could 
> possibly care
> about it at this level of detail.  The problem isn't what the 
> words say,
> but that if people go and try to change the words in teh 
> wrong forum like
> this, it _triples the amount of work I have to do_.  I didn't 
> sign up to
> do this three times, I signed up to do it once.  And if 
> people on the list
> make a habit of screwing up the process like this, it's going 
> to make it
> impossible to find anyone to do the work at all, in the 
> future.  I know
> it's going to take a lot more pursuading to get me to take it on again
> next time.  The pool of non-staff multi-region members isn't 
> that big, and
> many have even less time for this kind of nonsense than I do.

I understand, at this time I am trying to reach a compromise so the time
spent on this can be minimized to that already spent. Thanks.


> 
>                                 -Bill
> 
>