[arin-ppml] Petition Underway - Policy Proposal 95: Customer Confidentiality - Time Sensitive

[William Herrin]

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 2:34 PM, David Farmer <farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
> I would like to point out that PP#95 was originally put forward in June
> 2009, the AC decided it wouldn't be part of the Dearborn PPM, I supported
> this as I thought we had more important thins to work on.  It became clear
> that we the AC wasn't not going to have something ready for the Toronto PPM.
>  I therefore supported abandoning the proposal, at this time because it
> didn't make sense to me for us to keep it on our docket and not actually
> make any progress on it.

How is that delay possible anyway? Section 2.2 in the PDP reads in part:

"Council must make a decision regarding any policy proposal at their
next regularly scheduled meeting that occurs after the Advisory
Council receives the Clarity and Understanding Report from staff. If
the period before the next regularly scheduled meeting is less than 10
days, then the period may be extended to the subsequent regularly
scheduled meeting, but the period shall not be extended beyond 45
days."

I haven't examined the schedule in detail but it seems to me that more
time than that has elapsed since June 2009.


> Something for you to think about is that when the AC abandons a proposal it
> doesn't necessarily mean we think it is a bad idea.  It might mean that we
> don't have time for it now, that we want the community to decide if it
> should go forward, or that we honestly just don't know what to do with it,
> these are perfectly valid reasons to abandon a proposal too.

If its an actionable proposal but you "don't know what to do with it"
it seems bloody obvious to me that you should advance the proposal and
let the community determine what to do with it. Sitting in judgment is
the board's job. Yours is advising: first the proposal authors, second
the community at large and only as a distant third advising the board.

In proposal 95 as well as other recent proposals, it seems to me you
guys have skipped the "advising" part and move straight to judgment.


> Please remember the members of the AC are volunteers, we all have day jobs
> too, so there is a limit to how much we can accomplish.

I have a day job too, yet I've found the time to write thorough and
well supported proposals only to have the AC "fail to find the time"
for them.

I'm not so concerned about you but what about the the half of the AC
who can't even find time to participate on PPML?

Marla Azinger. Last PPML post September 2009
Stacy Hughes. Last PPML post September 2009
Heather Schiller. Last PPML post: July 2009
Dan Alexander. Last PPML post: June 2009
Bill Sandiford. Posted a message on the PPML exactly once.
Marc Crandall. Has he *ever* participated on the PPML?
Tom Zeller. No participation identified in the last decade of PPML archives.

Do you realize that only five of the fifteen of you have participated
in the PUBLIC policy mailing list this month?

I'm calling a Whisky Tango Foxtrot here.

Regards,
Bill Herrin


-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004