[arin-ppml] DP 2011-1 - How has the meaning changed?
hannigan at gmail.com
Thu Nov 10 18:07:45 EST 2011
Time to move on.
On Nov 10, 2011 4:49 PM, "Bill Darte" <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:
> So, OK....again you speak to the 'broken process'...and you say there is a
> King James re-write...
> Show me where the 'major' edits are....I call them tweaks and re-wording.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Hannigan [mailto:hannigan at gmail.com <hannigan at gmail.com>]
> Sent: Thu 11/10/2011 11:10 AM
> To: Bill Darte
> Cc: Bill Sandiford; Robert Seastrom; arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] DP 2011-1 - How has the meaning changed?
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Bill Darte <BillD at cait.wustl.edu> wrote:
> > All,
> [ clip ]
> > What is important is not the magnitude or timing of the wording changes,
> > but how faithful those changes were to reflecting what the community
> > calls for and the original intent of the DP whose language is changing.
> The record speaks for itself and disagrees.It's a good time to stop
> distracting the discussion and simply agree that the process was
> broken and get on with it. We agreed to move to last call with
> "tweaks". Not with a King James version rewrite.
> Vint summarized it best:
> Vint Cerf: "The reason I'm raising this as an issue, Mr. Chairman, is
> I'm concerned that the only way that the Advisory Council could
> continue to work on it is if we all voted to - in favor of this with
> some tweaks, because the value of tweak is a little undefined. That's
> what I'm concerned about. "
> From the transcripts:
> [ from where we start to form "the question" ]
> Tim Denton: Okay. So we have heard the language from Mr. DeLong. Do
> we favor it, moving it to last call with tweaks.
> The proposition is now going to be put to the house. Do we favor it
> being put to last call with the Advisory Council making language
> tweaks. Please signify your ascent if you agree. You can put your
> hands down.
> Those against the Advisory Council putting the proposition to last
> call even with tweaks. Those against the Advisory Council putting
> this to last call.
> Unidentified Speaker: A question of clarification. Based on what Owen
> had said, I thought we were going to be voting on whether or not this
> got kicked back for complete rework, not voting against it going back
> with tweaks. They're different somehow.
> Bill Darte: If it were to go to last call, then it would be in
> another cycle of work.
> Unidentified Speaker: That's not necessarily true.
> Tim Denton: Just a second. Can we just have - no. I don't want
> anything further. We're reaching the stages of lack of clarity.
> Now, is the vote - has the vote been taken? All right.
> 2011-1: ARIN Inter-regional Transfers. Those in the room voting and
> by remote, 124. Those who are moving it to last call and making such
> corrections as may be necessary, those in favor of the proposition
> were 24; those against were 17.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML