[arin-discuss] process and description of meetings

Scott Leibrand scottleibrand at gmail.com
Mon Jun 15 13:32:25 EDT 2009


I don't think Lee was implying that everyone should post on every 
topic.  Rather, he seems to be commenting on the fact that that every 
time staff puts up the summary of PPML comments, only about 10-15% of 
them clearly expressed support for or opposition to a proposal.  The 
rest are discussing details, or for whatever other reason aren't clearly 
in support of or opposition to the proposal more generally.


Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> Lee Howard wrote:
>> The Draft Policy is the text that goes to the public policy 
>> meetings.  Alternating with other informative presentations, every
>> Draft is presented to the people present (including remote 
>> participants),
>> beginning with a history of the proposal, including a summary of the 
>> debate so far.  For instance, for proposal 2009-4 presented in San
>> Antonio, we learned that 18 people had made 58 posts, of whom 3 were 
>> in favor, and 4 were against it (the rest apparently weren't
>> clear about their positions).  
> But, Lee, this is EXACTLY how it works In Real Life, ie: in real
> government.
> Take the US Congress for example.  At most congressional sessions,
> half the representatives and senators aren't present during the debates,
> aren't contributing, aren't even paying much attention.  Why?  Because
> whatever is up for debate isn't of interest to them.
> PPML has a number of topics that come up and not every one of them is
> of general interest.
> For example an org may not have native IPv6 connectivity and may have
> plenty of IPv4 and therefore may take the pragmatic approach that they
> are just going to ignore IPv6 for a few more years and let others figure
> the problems out.
> By contrast an org may have both IPv6/IPv4 and plenty of IPv4 and may
> decide that the issues of IPv4-sales, or IPv4-runout are entirely
> uninteresting.
> It is not necessary for every member of PPML to weigh in on every issue
> that is discussed here.  Sure they can if they want, but if members feel
> an issue doesn't apply to them - why is it necessary for them to post?
> Your making, I think, a rather insulting assumption that the people who
> don't post about a topic are failing to post because they are unclear,
> or confused, or have trouble following it.
> Sure, some people are probably in that camp.  I would submit if they 
> spent more time following the list and researching some of the posts
> they don't understand that they would come up to speed pretty quickly.
> Of course, some people out there refuse to spend anything more than the
> absolute minimum of time on anything that someone isn't handing them
> cash to spend time on - I pity these people as that attitude destroys
> the richness of life, but that's their choice, (and I'm sure they are
> a lot of the complainers since they want stuff spoon fed) - but I feel
> that at least as many people simply don't weigh in on issues that they
> feel don't affect them.
> We would get worse policy if a LOT of uninformed people were putting
> in their opinions, than if FEWER INFORMED people were putting in their
> opinions.  If the latter is happening now, we are doing pretty good.
> And, a year from now some of those in the "I'm clueless" camp will
> have moved into the "I'm clueful" camp, and some in the "I'm clueful"
> camp will have moved into the "I'm clueless" camp.  That's just how
> life works.
> After all, the US Constitutional Convention back in 1787 had SEVENTY
> appointed delegates, of which only 55 attended but only 42 of them 
> actually stayed to complete the US Constitution, and only 39 of those 
> actually signed it.  In other words, only 55% of the people selected
> to write the US Constitution actually ended up signing it - and only
> 3 people who DIDN'T sign the US Constitution, actually went on record
> declining to sing it (Gov. Randolph & G. Mason of VA and E. Gerry of MA)
> And that's the US Constitution!!!!!!!!
> Ted
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-Discuss
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Discussion Mailing List (ARIN-discuss at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-discuss
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list