[arin-ppml] Nomcom rejection explanatory letter

Mike Burns mike at iptrading.com
Mon Nov 8 17:51:14 EST 2021

I'm not sure I even get the point why it was written and sent, as there was no requirement for explanation.

Why would even one, much less two or three people think it was a good idea?

---- On Mon, 08 Nov 2021 17:34:25 -0500 Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com> wrote ----

On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 17:25 Jay Hennigan <mailto:jay at impulse.net> wrote:

On 11/4/21 10:47, John Curran wrote:
 > Patrick -
 > To be clear, this was the statement as prepared by Catherine Middleton, 
 > in her role as Chair of this year’s Nomination Committee.   The relevant 
 > portion of the ARIN Election Process is attached for reference.
 >  1.
 >     In consultation with ARIN’s GC, the NomCom Chair may prepare an
 >     explanatory statement of the relevant factors regarding a nominee
 >     not included on an election slate.
 Note: "In consultation with ARIN’s GC...."
 >> On 4 Nov 2021, at 11:53 AM, Patrick W. Gilmore <mailto:patrick at ianai.net 
 >> <mailto:mailto:patrick at ianai.net>> wrote:
 >> Sounds to me like a lawyer wrote it, not a member of the NomCom.
 >> Which implies the NomCom was not allowed to answer.
 Yep. This pretty much confirms that Patrick was right.

“Prepared  by” is also not “written by”. I’d feel ok with a guess  by the style that John did a fair amount of editing too. 



You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to 
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net). 
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: 
Please contact mailto:info at arin.net if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20211108/b2093c19/attachment.htm>

More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list