[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - January 2011
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:31 PM, cja at daydream.com <packetgrrl at gmail.com> wrote:
> I am sorry you feel that the AC brusquely disposes of policy proposals.
But you're not sorry for doing it, you're only sorry I feel that way.
> We actually aren't hasty. We spend a lot of time debating and discussing
Behind closed doors with, at best, an abbreviated version eventually
appearing in the form of meeting minutes.
> attempting to do the best job we can for the community. We get input from
> proposers, ppml, legal counsel, and ARIN staff. We came to the conclusion
> after much debate and discussion that 2009-8 should not move forward.
Perhaps you mean proposal 128? It is, after all, communication skills
that I'm complaining about. If you don't adequately explain
yourselves, and how can a brief, generic paragraph that 15 people
grudgingly assent to offer an adequate explanation, then how are the
proposal authors supposed to understand your decisions well enough to
do better with the next attempt? How indeed is the author to believe
that you gave his proposal any care at all?
> If you feel strongly that it should then please petition it.
I have no dog in that fight. My complaint lies where the AC can't find
the time for the -people- that try to participate in the policy
process. It would cost so little for each AC member voting to abandon
to write just one paragraph explaining their own reasons why. Yet it
would make such a difference.
It's not like I'm asking you to meet a standard I wouldn't have held
myself to had I been the one elected. Just some basic courtesy for the
folks whose efforts you choose to discard.
I'm going to shut up now before I beat the topic to death, but I hope
you'll take some of these comments to heart and decide that you can do
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004