[ppml] RE: Process improvement for Repeat Proposals

[stacy at hilander.com]

I wholeheartedly support your idea, Marla.  I believe it will relieve much of
the hairpulling we who are sentient at the meetings experience due to redundant
discussion.
We already summarize ppml discussions for the meeting, so it would be great have
this summarization too.
/s

Quoting "Azinger, Marla" <marla_azinger at eli.net>:

> Is any body out there?  Or did everyone pass out from eating to much
> triptafan in the Turkey?
>
> Just looking for some input on the posting I sent out on the 23rd.
>
> Cheers!
> Marla
> Electric Lightwave
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Azinger, Marla
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 9:20 AM
> To: 'John Brown CT'; Scott.Shackelford at cox.com
> Cc: Azinger, Marla; randy at psg.com; memsvcs at arin.net; ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Process improvement for Repeat Proposals
>
>
> Excuse me but I lost track of who made this statement:
>
> "Further I'd ad that some policy issues aren't related to integer
> > managment, but maybe related to people management at the policy orgs".
>
> I heard many people agree with this sentiment above at the last meeting.  We
> should keep in mint that this "people management" issue tends to get a
> little carried away at times in order to try and preserve the "spirit of
> unabashed input from all".
>
> However, there is another suggestion I put forward for a specific reoccuring
> experience.  The experience I am referring to is when a proposal has come
> back to a conference for discussion and vote for a second, third or God help
> us all a fourth time.  I suggest that when a proposal is coming back for a
> repeated time that a certain process is put in place.  Here it is:
>
> 1.  Results of the previouse conference discussion in regards to the
> re-visited proposal be placed up on a slide.  This slide should include the
> summary of all discussion points and the results of voting on those
> discussion points.  I also suggest that discussion points already voted on
> not be re-debated at the new conference since they have already been voted
> on.  This way...we could move forward alot faster and not spend every
> conference discussing the same thing over again and not getting anywhere.
>
> That is my suggestion.  I'm sure it can be added on or improved...but
> hopefully this starts the way to moving policy proposal a little faster
> towards its implementation or its abandonment.
>
>
> Marla Azinger
> Electric Lightwave
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Brown CT [mailto:john at chagres.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 8:50 AM
> To: Scott.Shackelford at cox.com
> Cc: marla_azinger at eli.net; randy at psg.com; memsvcs at arin.net;
> ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [ppml] composition of and representation on the BoT
>
>
> voteing is a subset of participate.  review/comment  should be
> encouraged prior to vote, imho
>
> Scott.Shackelford at cox.com wrote:
> > ammend to say:
> >
> > How do we encourage people to read policy, propose new policy,
> > review/comment/participate on both existing and or new policy?
> >
> > And ultimately to become more active in voting which is where I thought
> > this all started.
> >
> >
> > Scott Shackelford
> > IP Engineer/IP Administrator
> > Cox Communications
> > Office: 404-269-7312
> > IM: cypscott
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ppml at arin.net [mailto:owner-ppml at arin.net] On Behalf Of John
> > Brown CT
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 11:41 AM
> > To: Azinger, Marla
> > Cc: Randy Bush; Member Services; ppml at arin.net
> > Subject: Re: [ppml] composition of and representation on the BoT
> >
> >
> >>"How do we encourage people to read policy, policy proposals and voice
> >
> > an
> >
> >>opinion?"
> >
> >
> > ammend to say:
> >
> > How do we encourage people to read policy, propose new policy,
> > review/comment/participate on both existing and or new poilicy?
> >
> > Further I'd ad that some policy issues aren't related to integer
> > managment, but maybe related to people management at the policy orgs.
> >
> >
> >
>