[arin-ppml] Serious question for the list.

[Mike Burns]

Hi Ted,

Thanks for the input.
I understand what you are saying about the dangers of the unwashed.
What about a blog?
Do you think it would be okay to advocate a position in blog and solicit 
participation on the list?

Regards,
Mike

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm at ipinc.net>
To: <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Serious question for the list.


> On 5/5/2011 11:02 AM, Mike Burns wrote:
>> It seems to me that the decision about needs analysis for transfers may
>> have some large non-technical components, like one's view of the role of
>> markets in allocating scarce resources.
>> Yes, there are issues of deaggregation, which are too technical for the
>> layman.
>> Yes, there is a danger of overburdening the policy development system,
>> not something anyone would want.
>> But do we want a technical elite making decisions that are not really
>> technical, like the value of unrestricted versus restricted markets?
>
> No, we do not.
>
>> Are we inside an ivory tower?
>>
>
> No, but there is a proper way to bring the general public into the
> decision making in a large volume.
>
> There isn't (in my opinion) a problem with posting in a rag like
> the Libertarian Times or some such, that a mailing list like ppml
> EXISTS.  The very few members of the general public who waste their
> time with that stuff and who are at all competent and really care
> about the issue will investigate, make themselves fully aware of
> all of the arguments on all sides of the issue, as well as look
> up the rules for the ppml list (which I will remind everyone,
> ARIN owns and makes the rules on) then join and contribute in
> a positive way.
>
> But the majority of the members of the general public who waste
> their time with that stuff and who are NOT competent will find the
> bar of actually having to look up the instructions for posting
> and rules for joining too difficult to master, and will stay away.
>
> Unless, that is, the poster of the article in the Libertarian Times
> gives an explicit step-by-step set of instructions for how to
> go about subscribing, that a blind monkey could follow.
>
> If you really and truly want to bring people into the decision
> making process who are too ignorant to google up "ppml mailing list"
> then the proper way is via publishing a survey in the ragazine.
>
> The author of the article in the Libertarian Times can create a
> dumbed-down survey on someplace like survey.com or whatever, that
> the ignoramuses can comprehend.
>
> Then we can get the feedback from the unwashed masses without
> being drowned in an onslaught of 5000 fools wanting to know what
> an IP address is and why we can't make more of them.
>
> But, to save you the time I can predict what the general public
> will say in advance - boiled down:
>
> "I want what I have to stay the same and I don't give a damn
> if it staying the same prevents 3/4 of the people in the world
> who aren't on the Internet now, from ever getting on it.  I
> got mine, Jack, and screw the rest of them."
>
> Ted
>
>> Regards,
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Farmer" <farmer at umn.edu>
>> To: "Martin Hannigan" <hannigan at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Mike Burns" <mike at nationwideinc.com>; <arin-ppml at arin.net>; "David
>> Farmer" <farmer at umn.edu>
>> Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 1:45 PM
>> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Serious question for the list.
>>
>>
>>> On 5/5/11 12:25 CDT, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:17 PM, David Farmer<farmer at umn.edu> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/5/11 11:49 CDT, Mike Burns wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> I have had an idea.
>>>>>> Since it has been determined that everybody in the ARIN community 
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> an email address may participate in policy development, how does the
>>>>>> list feel about soliciting the input from a broader group of
>>>>>> participants?
>>>>>
>>>>> While not an absolute requirement, I believe there is an
>>>>> understanding that
>>>>> some minimal level of technical expertise and interest in the
>>>>> details of
>>>>> the subject matter are necessary in order to provide useful or
>>>>> meaningful
>>>>> contribution to the process.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So we would exclude members of the general public (users) then?
>>>
>>> Where did I say exclude? "not an absolute requirement", an "interest
>>> in the details" are needed for a "meaningful contribution". None of
>>> that means exclude in my book, it simply means that participation
>>> takes effort and if you want people to take you seriously you need to
>>> make a effort. That is true in many parts of civil society.
>>>
>>> --
>>> ===============================================
>>> David Farmer Email:farmer at umn.edu
>>> Networking & Telecommunication Services
>>> Office of Information Technology
>>> University of Minnesota 2218 University Ave SE Phone: 612-626-0815
>>> Minneapolis, MN 55414-3029 Cell: 612-812-9952
>>> ===============================================
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> PPML
>> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
>> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
>> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
>> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
>> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net if you experience any issues.