[arin-ppml] Suggestions for PDP improvement

[William Herrin]

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Alexander, Daniel
<Daniel_Alexander at cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> If I try to sum up your thoughts on the PDP would this be fair? You prefer
> a process where policy development is driven more by the Internet
> "Community" (both members and non-members of ARIN), and less by any
> member-elected body.

Hi Dan,

Not driven by. Done by. World of difference.

I "drive" U.S. policy by voting for congress and president and by
writing them letters. For a couple years, even by working for them
directly. But I have virtually no stake in any of the details. That's
all the doing of those "a-holes in Washington" who on a good day are
knuckle-headed and on a bad day are filthy corrupt.

If I write a policy, it's mine. If I gain the consensus of my fellows
and something I wrote is adopted then that piece of the NRPM is there
because of me. Even if I just sit on the sidelines, the fact that I
can be the one to step up next cycle on a matter I care about and be
judged only by my peers... That EMPOWERS me. It gives me an ownership
of and responsibility for the resulting policy. It gives me a personal
stake in the continued success of the organization which administers
that policy.

On the flip side, I cobble together an idea and then I'm forced to
turn it over to a cabal I had no choice in selecting. If they don't
reject it out of hand, they committee-rewrite it a few of times. I
have no stake in that. If I'm very lucky it still does something
vaguely similar to what I wanted. I may acquiesce but enthusiastic
consent? No. Almost never.



> On a related note, do you think there are any efficiencies to be gained by
> granting more flexibility to a member-elected body rather than waiting for
> a large body to reach an uncontested conclusion? Of course this is
> provided it can be countered with appropriate checks and balances to try
> and prevent the conflicts of interest you have mentioned? Do you think
> this is possible?

I believe this would be disastrous and doubt that any effective set of
checks and balances can be found. Moreover, efficiency and speed are
inimical to consensus. In the rush, you can't help but leave behind
individuals who, with a just little more care, could have been drawn
in to the fold.


> One of the the items we discussed at length with the proposed PDP changes
> was to incorporate the ability to poll the mailing list in addition to the
> show of hands at a PPM. This expands the audience of those who can be
> counted, and provides a wider sample of opinion not limited to those who
> can travel to a meeting. Do you think this will help provide a better
> corollary to the decisions the AC may want to make?

No.

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