[arin-discuss] [arin-ppml] Advisory Council Position Petitions?

Ted Mittelstaedt tedm at ipinc.net
Wed Sep 23 13:51:20 EDT 2009


   Sorry for the top post,

   The problem here is going to hinge around this:

"...The NomCom selects those nominees that is feels are most
qualified and builds a ballot for each election..."

   Without even a general specification of the criteria the
Nominating Committee is using, it is perfectly understandable
that some individuals who were excluded would naturally be
frustrated at why they were excluded.

   I have also seen a similar process used for not only other
Internet organizations in their selections, but also for many
other types of 503(c) organizations.

   In my opinion the level of transparency of this process has
a huge effect on the support for the organization.

   ARIN is in a unique position here compared to your
run-of-the-mill Internet organization, because
dissatisfied individuals simply cannot run away; ARIN is the
only org that does what it does.  ARIN therefore lacks the
self-selecting safety valve that another org
does which uses an opaque selection process.  People cannot
"vote with their feet" with ARIN. An "Internet Organization"
like for example the IETF can act like a feudal keep if they
want, since if you don't like what they are doing you can
just create your own "standard" and ignore them or find some
other, more pliant "standards body" that will do what you want
and lend a veneer of respectability on what your doing.  We
are perfectly familiar with examples of vendors that routinely
do this so I won't belabor the point further.

I would submit that your paragraph explaining the nomcom selection
process is very disappointing with the amount of transparency
in it, and I am alarmed at phrases like "consideration of each candidate 
in closed session".

As long as the nomcom was simply rubber-stamping applications to
be a candidate, the underlying problem with using an opaque
candidate selection process was essentially masked, but if the
nomcom is going to flex it's authority to deny candidates, without
increasing transparency of the selection process, I suspect ARIN
is going to create completely unnecessary and distracting controversy.

I would recommend that it's imperative that the NomCom
produce an objective summary of what they feel constitutes a qualified 
candidate.  It is also important to keep in mind that these are
only candidates - the NomCom needs to trust that the membership
doing the voting has the wisdom to select the most qualified
candidates during the election.


John Curran wrote:
> On Sep 22, 2009, at 4:09 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
>> Yesterday there was one petition for an AC member.  Today there's
>> an additional petition, and a note from Marty to arin-discuss. ...
>> I've moved to PPML as I think the people who interact with the AC
>> the most, and care the most about who is on the AC are on PPML, not
>> arin-discuss.
>> Marty's message suggests multiple people were excluded from running
>> for some reason, and we now have two petitions that seem to back
>> up that assertion.  Are there going to be more petitions?  Can someone
>> explain what happened?
> Leo -
> The NomCom is chartered with delivering a sufficient ballot for each  
> election.  The ARIN Bylaws specify that such a ballot shall consist of  
> the number of seats being filled + 1 as a minimum.  There is no  
> maximum specified, nor any requirement to deliver all candidates to  
> the ballot.  The NomCom selects those nominees that is feels are most  
> qualified and builds a ballot for each election.  There is no  
> assurance of selection, even if that has been the practice in the past.
> This is exactly how the NomCom process was set up to function, as it  
> was considered far better than the Board selecting new BoT and AC  
> members (as in ARIN's original Bylaws) but still allowed for in-depth  
> consideration of each candidate in closed session.  This process, by  
> the way, is materially the same one used by other Internet  
> organizations in their selection process.  The availability of a  
> petition process is felt to be reasonable safety value to insure that  
> candidates who feel that they are well-qualified despite the NomCom  
> recommendation may take the matter to the community.
> I welcome any and all suggestions for improvement of the process, but  
> Marty was correct that this is not a matter of Internet number  
> resource policy, so please send suggestions to me directly or to "arin- 
> discuss" as desired.
> /John
> John Curran
> President and CEO
> _______________________________________________
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.

More information about the ARIN-discuss mailing list