[ppml] Metric for rejecting policy proposals: AC candidate question

[Bill Woodcock]

      On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Robert E.Seastrom wrote:
    > I agree with both Stacy and Andrew.  Micromanagement of operational
    > issues via the public policy process is not a desirable outcome;
    > unnecessarily constrains ARIN staff and if done too often will result
    > in the NRPM becoming huge and unwieldy.  The AC finding that something
    > "can best be addressed by the ARIN Board of Trustees" is completely
    > neutral on the proposal's merits, it's just a suggestion that it is
    > more operational than policy oriented.

For what it's worth, as the author of one of the two proposals which was 
referred to the board by the AC, I'm 100% happy with the outcome.  The 
outcome was far better, in fact, than I'd been imagining or hoping for.  
And the board just referred it to staff.  

So I think the issue is that sometimes there are things which the staff 
may need to do differently, or may even want to do differently, and they 
just need to be given the go-ahead to prioritize them more highly.  In my 
case, that process worked great, and the putting-up-a-policy-proposal-and-
routing-it-through-the-AC was, in fact, just time lost.

In retrospect, I should have used the "suggestion box" method, I was just 
being a little too hot-headed.  If I'd emailed in the suggestion, rather 
than posting a policy proposal, I probably would have gotten what I wanted 
a month earlier.

                                -Bill