[arin-ppml] The AC has a job to do with 2009-1, can you please help?

[Scott Beuker]

As someone who struggles to find the time to read all of the PPML,
I've longed for a while now for some kind of system that rewards
brevity. I generally find participation pointless because a small,
very vocal group tend to force their opinions with sheer quantity.
By the time I've caught up to the backlog, the list has moved on to
the next topic.

It might seem stringent at first, but I think a measure to limit the
number of posts anyone can make to x posts per y hours would be
beneficial to the larger base of participants. I'd favour a limit
on the length of messages, too. Force people to think about what
they write a little harder, increase the signal and limit the noise.
Exceptions of course for the Board/AC.

I know before I send it that this probably won't be a very popular
suggestion, but if you want me to keep up with discussion and provide
more timely feedback on policies and ideas, this is how to do it.

- Scott


> I think there's something else going on. We routinely get in-depth
> discussion of some issues on PPML, but usually from a small group of
> active participants. We then have hundreds of attendees at the public
> policy meetings, where another group of active participants does most
> of the talking at the mic. But then, when we have a vote, most of the
> silent attendees express their opinion, based on the arguments
> presented.
> 
> Perhaps we should make more use of online polling mechanisms to
> accomplish something similar on PPML. Or perhaps the current system
> works well enough.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> -Scott