[arin-ppml] Advisory Council Meeting Results - May 2010

[Owen DeLong]

>>> 
>> Yes, this is how it is intended.  However, there are votes. There are
>> votes by the community in the public policy meetings which are advisory
>> in nature and there are votes by the AC and the Board which determine
>> the final outcome of policy proposals.
> 
> If the "votes" taken in public policy meetings are advisory (and I think they are), then the votes at the *Advisory* Committee could be considered advisory as well. It takes formal Board action, and presumably a simple majority vote, to *enact* a new Policy.
> 
To a certain extent, you are correct.  If the AC rejects a policy and it is not
petitioned, other than the emergency policy process, the board does not
have the power to enact a policy abandoned by the AC.

> Determining if consensus exists is typically relatively easy. It's done routinely at any number of organizations where a priori guidelines and rules have been established to help the participants and leaders make informed consensus decisions. In those same organizations, it can be monumentally difficult to *achieve* consensus.
> 
In this circumstance, given the number of different inputs to the process
and the ambiguity of much of the input received, it is not always as
easy as you might think for the AC to determine consensus, but, yes,
usually it is.

> The PDP is quite clear that the AC is charged with determining consensus of the community. In my experience, it is relatively easy to determine if consensus exists. Achieving consensus may be monumentally difficult and time consuming but the determination of its existence is straightforward.
> 
> As I understand the PDP, the AC is charged with the simpler task. 
> 
The AC is charged with determining several things, consensus being
but one of them.

Owen

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20100529/5d6e8396/attachment.htm>