[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-6 - Abandoned
bicknell at ufp.org
Thu Apr 26 20:32:13 EDT 2007
In a message written on Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 09:49:27AM -0700, David Williamson wrote:
> While I agree that there's not community consensus, I'm disappointed
> that the AC chose to ignore the half of the people in the room who
> voted in favor of this proposal by not choosing to work to revise the
The thought process was that it was unlikely a "minor" change to
this policy would produce a major change in community support.
Typically the "work with the author" option is used to address
straight forward objections raised in the meeting or on PPML and
where it's believed that if those objections are addressed the
policy has a good chance of passing.
In this case I know I personally didn't see that. There were a
wide range of objections in the meeting, and there was no obvious
way to address them with language change. As an AC member I believe
in these cases it's better to draft a new policy, with new title
There is a last call petition process to move forward if you feel
that is the right thing to do. I'm not sure it's possible to
petition "work with the author".
I do believe that several people recommended the shepherds continue
to work with you on a proposal in this line of thinking. I don't
have the minutes of the AC meeting yet, so I can't be sure though.
In any event, if you do want to revise I suggest you contact the
shepherds for this proposal and see what you can do to increase the
chances of gaining support at the next meeting. You can also, of
course, resubmit the same proposal if you believe a different
justification will make the difference.
Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request at tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ARIN-PPML