[arin-discuss] [ARIN-Suggestions] New ACSP Suggestion 2014.10: CHANGES TO CANDIDATE SPEECHES
swm at emanon.com
Fri Jun 6 15:36:40 EDT 2014
>Hmm, interesting point.
>To be a candidate to simply create the ability to speak about another
>is not fair to the election and review process.
>Having a time controlled "open mike" for the general membership to
>express a statement is not a bad idea.
>I remember, that there used to be (could still be) a way for people
>to post written statements about a candidate.
And how would that end up being different than a candidate/board member
being able to talk about someone? As soon as you give someone a voice,
whether it be physical or virtual, you have to be prepared for what they
If it doesn¹t deter from anything, or cause serious problems with
anything, then who cares? If you don¹t want it to occur, then don¹t give
them a voice. In which case we¹ll all vote in the dark pretending to be
clueful about who the people are or what they stand for. (e.g. Not
I have no problem letting people say whatever is on their mind. Just give
them a set timeframe in which to do it so that worst case scenario, I know
how long I have to tune out for.
Keep It Simple
More information about the ARIN-discuss