[arin-discuss] proposal: cloture procedures

[John Curran]

Eddy -
 
      If you submit this to the ARIN consultation and suggestion process
      <http://www.arin.net/acsp/index.html>, then it will be considered
      independently.

      In any case, in light of numerous posts about maintaining effective
      communications on the mailing lists, we will also add the general topic
      of mailing list decorum to the ARIN Denver Meeting for discussion.

/John

At 2:49 PM +0000 2/5/08, Edward B. DREGER wrote:
>
>[ apologies if this is better suited to PPML ]
>
>I move that ARIN lists would benefit from cloture procedures.  Proposal:
>
>=====
>
>1. Any member may request a thread-kill vote:
>
>	a. via a user-authenticated section on ARIN's website;
>
>	b. once within a 30-day moving window;
>
>	c. for a thread discussed on any list to which s/he is
>	subscribed, without regard to posting priviliges or
>	participation level.
>
>2. Upon request per (1):
>
>	a. a thread-kill announcement shall be sent to the list;
>
>	b. the "time of announcement" shall be the time that ARIN MXes
>	finished conversation with the last-contacted subscriber MX,
>	without regard to 2xx/4xx/5xx/other status.
>
>3. Votes must be cast within 48 hours of (2).
>
>4. A two-thirds majority of the votes cast via (3) shall be required to
>kill a thread.
>
>5. In the event that two-thirds of list subscribers vote in favor of
>killing a thread before deadline (3), the thread shall be killed
>immediately.
>
>=====
>
>Note that the required majority should be high:  Individuals not
>interested in a discussion or poster can use client-side filtering rules
>on a spot basis.  Cloture should be reserved for clear-cut cases where
>it would benefit more than a simple majority.
>
>I feel that this would benefit all subscribers.  Those wishing to stop a
>discussion would have a means to do so -- iff backed by sufficient like
>minds.  Those wishing to continue a discussion would have a manifest to
>do so were sufficient votes not cast.
>
>Then we can quit arguing about whether we should quit arguing. :-)
>
>Eddy