[arin-ppml] Petition draft 2011-1 last call

[CJ Aronson]

To say that no one in the community has had a chance to respond to the new
text is far from the truth.  This extended last call has given the
community ample chance to comment and many folks have commented.

----Cathy

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 5:05 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Sweeting, John
> <john.sweeting at twcable.com> wrote:
> > Just to set the record straight, the AC spent over an hour discussing and
> > working on the new text in a pre-meeting workshop. This was in addition
> to
> > the time spent by some AC members working on the text the day/night
> > before. Thanks!
>
> John,
>
> Thanks, but there's nothing being set straight with respect to this
> posting in your response. It was never indicated that someone on the
> AC didn't work on the text. The point of the post was to demonstrate
> that the text was so significantly changed that no one in the
> community had an opportunity to review or comment on it prior to the
> AC discussion and fast forwarding.
>
> If you'd like to share the version that was presented to the AC during
> the AC meeting pre-meeting, that might be additionally helpful to
> demonstrate the difference further.
>
> Best!
>
> -M<
>
>
>
> >
> > ++
> >
> > On 11/8/11 4:15 PM, "Martin Hannigan" <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Bill Darte <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:
> >>> Bill,
> >>>
> >>
> >>[ clip ]
> >>
> >>>
> >>> My point is that we work hard in the role that we have to respond to
> the
> >>> needs of the community and to craft policy..in a timely fashion...which
> >>>the
> >>> community wants.  As such, we reshaped the 2011-1 language to respond
> to
> >>> what we heard in Philly and in San Juan before.
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>I think that the minuted portion of the post PPM AC meetings held
> >>directly after the Friday session say differently. In fact, nothing
> >>related to commentary or results of either meeting was discussed.
> >>There was not vote taken on this text in PHL so I'm not sure how
> >>you're able to make the conclusions that you are. .
> >>
> >
> >
> > This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
> proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
> copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely
> for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you
> are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that
> any dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to
> the contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and
> may be unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify
> the sender immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of
> this E-mail and any printout.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20111108/a1d33714/attachment.htm>