[arin-discuss] [ppml] Counsel statement on Legacy assignments?

[Howard, W. Lee]

> -  Was the community ever asked about supporting Nanog?

It is not customary to poll the community for every expenditure.
That's why the community elects representatives, so every
network engineer doesn't have to vote on every expense.  We
publish our budget and financial statements, exactly so 
members of the community can provide this kind of feedback.  
Your opposition to this line item has been noted, and is
considered along with the opinions of others.
 
> -  Why should ARIN support Nanog?

See my previous response to this question, 
http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/2007-October/000498.html
NANOG is a valuable service to the community.  Participation
is better with joint meetings.  Participation is better with
a webcast.  See also the last clause of ARIN's mission 
statement at www.arin.net.

> > Several people at the ARIN meeting went out of their way to tell me
> > they appreciated the joint meeting.  A few have said so in private
> > email.  I encourage all concerned members of the community to attend
> > the Spring meeting.
> 
> "Several people" and cronyism with ARIN board members, does 
> not seem to
> justify the benefits being transferred from ARIN to Nanog, when ARIN
> members including myself can't participate in Nanog, 

To date, expressions of support for these activites has been
predominantly favorable.  If there are others who believe
ARIN should redirect its resources, I hope they will contribute
to this thread, or email the Board member of their choosing.

I'll point out again that ARIN's contribution is specifically
in support of the webcast, to provide benefit to the entire
membership.


Lee