[arin-ppml] Suggestions for PDP improvement

[Owen DeLong]

On Nov 11, 2011, at 1:38 PM, William Herrin wrote:

> 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.
> 
If you can find 10 people that agree with you among your peers, you
can get your original text all the way to the board using the petition
process no matter what the AC did to it along the way.

I don't think referring to us as a cabal is a fair characterization.

Owen