[ppml] Metric for rejecting policy proposals: AC candidate question

[Stacy Taylor]

Hi Sam,
If the AC deems an issue better handled by another path or process, it
is its responsibility to forward it on.

Stacy

On 9/19/06, Sam Weiler <weiler at tislabs.com> wrote:
> Earlier this year, the AC rejected two public policy proposals on the
> grounds that the "matter ... can best be addressed by the ARIN Board
> of Trustees." [1] [2]
>
> I'd like to hear from each of the ten AC candidates as to whether they
> agree with that it's appropriate to reject a policy proposal merely
> because there's a "better" path for resolving the matter (rather than,
> for instance, because the matter is "clearly inappropriate" for the
> public policy process).
>
> To be clear, I'm not asking if the AC made the right call on these
> particular two proposals -- I'm asking if the candidates think it is
> appropriate to reject a policy proposal merely because they see a
> better path to accomplishing its stated goals.  (e.g., because they
> think the new Consultation and Suggestion Process (ACSP) [3] is a
> "better" venue for the request than the full public policy process)
>
> Personally, I'm disappointed that the AC would reject a policy
> proposal merely because it would be "best" addressed outside the
> public policy process rather than because it's "clearly inappropriate"
> for the public policy process -- the public policy process should at
> least be available as a fallback if the "best" path doesn't work or is
> unacceptable for some reason.
>
> -- Sam Weiler
>
> [1] http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/ppml/2006-May/005478.html
> [2] http://lists.arin.net/pipermail/ppml/2006-June/005505.html
> [3] http://www.arin.net/about_us/corp_docs/acsp.html
>


-- 
:):)
/S