[arin-ppml] 2011-1 not adopted Was:Re: Board Adopts Draft Policies

[Scott Leibrand]

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM, William Herrin <bill at herrin.us> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com> wrote:
>>> On Jan 18, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Paul Vixie <paul at redbarn.org> wrote:
>>>>> Marty, I'm ever curious to know if there's anything bad going on with
>>>>> ARIN.
>>>>
>>>> Paul, there isn't enough buffer memory in my browser for me to answer
>>>> that question. It's also off topic for the most part, belonging as
>>>> part of a discussion at the members meeting more than the policy
>>>> forum.
>>>
>>> You could always use a real MUA and answer the question on arin-discuss
>>> if you feel it's a membership matter rather than policy.
>>
>> Thanks for again being an example of what is wrong with ARIN at the
>> exact right time.
>
>
> Clarifying for those who didn't catch it: arin-discuss is a closed
> forum available only to paying ISP members. NOT transparent. Correct
> me if I'm wrong Marty, but you believe this attitude, this kind of
> default thinking, is symptomatic of the AC majority's disrespect for
> the general public.

I don't think anyone is trying to move anything out of open forums and
into closed ones.  The context here was an attempt to get feedback
(here, on the open PPML list) if anyone feels that there is anything
that can be improved at ARIN.  It's also worth noting that the
member's meetings are open to the general public, and that the
arin-discuss list is very low traffic.  The last thread I see on
arin-discuss was back on October 5th, when Marty suggested that we
move a meeting item to a different timeslot in order to allow for
increased community participation.  All of the items discussed since
then have been here on PPML.

There will also be a new Policy Development Process being posted for
community input, maybe in a month or two from what I've heard.  The
drafts I've seen of the new PDP (including at the most recent public
policy meeting) push for additional transparency from the AC in at
least one area, requiring the AC to document its consideration of
input received from the public on policy proposals.

-Scott