[arin-ppml] Internet Fairness

[Owen DeLong]

It's always fun when people depend on nameless faceless silent majorities to bolster their argument.

Bottom line, in this as in all things, decisions are made by those who show up. If the members of the community who do not comment and/or only hold legacy allocations continue to not speak up, then it is impossible for us to consider their support based solely on your belief that it exists.

If you truly believe this to be the case, then rally them to come out and support what you want. I assure you that if they do, policy will change based on consensus of the expanded body of participation. However, we can only operate on the consensus of those who voice an opinion. It is impossible to count support or opposition from those who do not voice it.

This is true in any deliberative body and in any policy process of which I am aware. There is simply no viable or accurate way to measure the opinions of those who choose not to voice an opinion.

Owen

> On Dec 18, 2014, at 09:27 , Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
> 
> Maybe a majority of the vocal community does, but I doubt if you add in all members of the community who do not comment and all the members of the community that only hold legacy allocations, I suspect that might not be the case.  I think the legacy community is speaking volumes by not participating by commenting in this forum.  
> 
> Thanks.  
> 
> Steven Ryerse
> President
> 100 Ashford Center North, Suite 110, Atlanta, GA  30338
> 770.656.1460 - Cell
> 770.399.9099- Office
> 
> ℠ Eclipse Networks, Inc.
>                     Conquering Complex Networks℠
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Buhrmaster [mailto:gary.buhrmaster at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2014 12:12 PM
> To: Steven Ryerse
> Cc: Owen DeLong; arin-ppml at arin.net
> Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Internet Fairness
> 
> On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com> wrote:
>> 
>> All of those stats are interesting but they are not what is important here.  What is important is how many small Orgs that applied for the minimum allocation (as it was defined at the time of the allocation request) since ARIN was chartered were denied because of needs policy.
>> 
>> I don’t know what that number is but if it is greater than zero, it shouldn’t have happened!  ARIN’s Mission is to Advance the Internet, not to stifle it.
> 
> While there is clearly support by some for your position advocating needless number allocations, the majority of the community supports a review to insure that the allocations are actually advancing the Internet, and not just throwing numbers around to whomever asks, whatever their plans (or lack thereof).