[arin-ppml] Suggestions for PDP improvement

[Owen DeLong]

> 
> I'd like to hear from other policy proposal submitters in this area,
> (as I'm not certain all have had experiences similar to your own) but
> the feedback is helpful for the current revision process as well.
> 

John,

I don't think there is any question that I have submitted a significant
quantity (and some significant quality) of policy proposals over the
years. I cannot offer a non-AC author's perspective on the PDP, as
I joined the AC prior to the end of the IRPEP (though very near
the transition point).

However, having been an author on both sides of the fence (on the
AC and off), I will say the following:

1. I don't believe that author's who are not AC members are in any
	way discounted in the process. I think that the AC carefully
	considers each policy proposal on its merits and not based
	on who it comes from.

	I realize that this perception may not be shared by all and may
	especially be held in disbelief by authors that have shown a
	talent for writing remarkably bad proposals.

	However, I will note that even as a member of the AC, I have
	submitted several proposals which have been abandoned
	at all stages of the process, including not even being accepted
	onto the AC's docket. In many cases, I myself have voted
	against them based on changing circumstances and/or
	community feedback.

2. Like most political and organizational processes, the PDP
	is hard on those who seek to make changes. I have left
	the podium feeling very dejected, deflated, and on the
	verge of abandoning the entire process more than once
	in my early days of participation. Fortunately, I have
	friends in the community and they helped me to learn
	that I should not take it personally and that sometimes my
	best idea is the community's idea of a bad idea and vice
	versa. As a result I picked myself up and continued
	forward. I like to think good things have happened as a result.

	I also try to remember those feelings when dealing with
	authors and others whose policies we don't advance.
	When possible, I try to reach out and convey those same
	reassurances. Some authors have been more receptive
	than others.

3. Modulo the feedback I've already provided, I think the current
	PDP and the revisions proposed are generally a good
	step forward and in the correct direction. However, I do think
	that work should be done to make the process friendlier
	for non-AC policy authors. I'm not sure exactly how to achieve
	that, but, I think it is good feedback and worthy of consideration.

Owen