[ppml] Markets, pricing, transparency, 2008-2 / 8.3.9

[Tom Vest]

On Mar 17, 2008, at 7:15 PM, Jo Rhett wrote:

> On Mar 17, 2008, at 3:50 PM, Tom Vest wrote:
>> In this sense, the imposition of "artificial"*, policy-determined  
>> bounties could help to set set the upper limit on prices that  
>> could be credibly demanded by non-signatories, thereby further  
>> reducing the potential for runaway inflation, speculation,  
>> hoarding, etc. So to me this seems like a feature and not a bug.
>
> I don't think that trying to control this market is possible.  I  
> certainly don't think that ARIN should waste time attempting to do so.
>
> If we do this, let's facilitate the process not encumber it.

Hi Jo,

Since you chose to extract that lone passage to respond to, and to  
leave out my *explanatory note*, I feel obliged to respond:

Which "market" exactly are you referring to? Since no market has been  
commissioned yet, and none of any size is apparent to me at the  
moment, which "market" specifically are you seeing, or predicting to  
be absolutely inevitable and uncontrollable? Why should other  
community members adopt such a fatalistic attitude in this particular  
case, rather then doing what they have always done in the past, i.e.,  
try to adopt to changing circumstances in a way that best preserves  
the goals and values of an open Internet, and leaves the open  
possibility of additional adjustments and/or improvements and/or  
corrections down the line?

It makes sense to say something like this if you actively embrace  
whichever "market" you foresee as the future of choice for yourself.  
But if that's the case, clarity would be better served by simply  
declaring your support for it (and clearly bracketing what "it" is),  
rather than claiming that it's inevitable without some supporting  
reasoning.

TV, who regrets all past ambiguities and pledges to be as clear as  
possible for the remainder of this debate...