Nowhere in my message was the term "foregone conclusion" used. The
term "intention" was used. If you know of other individuals you
feel would be more appropriate for the position, I'm sure the Board
would be interested in hearing about them. And before you jump in
and say "but you are on the Board", I am getting ready to make
some minor changes to the proposal, one of which is the modification
of the makeup of the ARIN Board. The ARIN Board will now consist
of 7 members, 5 voting and 2 ex-officio. I will be an ex-officio
member of the ARIN Board of Trustees.
> At 01:29 AM 2/2/97 -0500, Kim Hubbard wrote:
> >If it makes you feel any less concerned....the intention is that
> >once ARIN is operational, there will be only one NSI employee on
> >the board, as I will be an employee of ARIN.
> Although many of us have assumed so as a start, why is it a foregone
> conclusion that you are going to be ED of ARIN? (I actually think that you
> are the best choice that I know of, but it still shouldn't be a foregone
> conclusion IMHO).
> >Of course, you are
> >free to infer something out of that fact also, since there is
> >probably nothing I could say to stop those of you who feel
> >that NSI has some hidden agenda regarding ARIN.
> I will state that I do not believe that NSI has a hidden agenda with
> respect to ARIN. If I were NSI I would want to get as far from IP
> allocation as I could.
> Justin Newton
> Network Architect
> Erol's Internet Services