[arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway

Jason Baugher jasonbaugher at adamstel.com
Wed Oct 13 13:25:39 EDT 2021


John, I won’t attempt to speak for Owen, but rather would address the suggestion of Board involvement in the process.

As an outsider to the process, I understand that the Board chooses from it’s own ranks 2 members of the NomCom, who then solicit volunteers and select to add them to the NomCom. Then the NomCom chooses candidates with no oversight or transparency to it’s decision-making process. Finally, we as members get to vote from the chosen candidates.

Does the Board itself participate in the candidate review? As an entity, I’m sure it doesn’t. However, the Board is choosing the trustees for the NomCom, and the NomCom is choosing the volunteers. The 2 Trustees aren’t going to solicit a contrarian voice to be on the NomCom, and by extension the NomCom isn’t going to accept a candidate from the same bent.

The only way someone can break the cycle is by a successful petition and getting enough votes, which is inherently unfair because those chosen by the NomCom have no such petition requirement.

You can hardly blame us for questioning this arrangement, regardless of how benign the decisions being made behind closed doors may actually be, because the process itself implies otherwise. Some fairly simple changes could be made that would clear up the doubt, and hopefully those will be considered before the next election cycle. If they are not, and the process remains the same, I suspect we’ll be rehashing this same discussion.

Jason

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of John Curran
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 7:32 AM
To: Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com>
Cc: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway

CAUTION: This email is from OUTSIDE our organization.
Please do not open/download any attachment or click any link unless you know it's safe.
Owen -

I am unclear of exactly what you are suggesting about Board involvement, but for sake of clarity will note that the ARIN Board of Trustees is neither made aware nor does it ever discuss those individuals who are nominated for ARIN elected positions.

The ARIN Board of Trustees does provide guidance to the NomCom in the form of a public letter each year which outlines the Board’s view on the trustee requirements that it deems necessary to fulfill its strategic leadership & oversight role for the organization.   The "Board Guidance Letter to the NomCom” is published before the nomination period begins and is prominently noted on the ARIN website in each year’s election materials (for reference the 2021 Board Guidance letter can be found here - https://www.arin.net/vault/participate/elections/nomcom_guidance2021.pdf)

The public guidance letter constitutes the complete extent of the Board’s involvement in the NomCom’s nominee assessment and election slate development activities.

Thanks,
/John

John Curran
President and CEO
American Registry for Internet Numbers


On 12 Oct 2021, at 1:39 AM, arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>> wrote:

I suspect they were given board guidance that lead to this unfortunate and undesirable action.

Owen



On Oct 11, 2021, at 20:08 , Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com<mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>> wrote:

The members of the NomCom aren't allowed to make public statements like that about the private proceedings of the NomCom. Given the NomCom is made up of individuals that many of us know personally and highly respect, I think it is unlikely that they acted with any ill intent. And if some members of the NomCom were attempting to disqualify individuals for political reasons or anything like that, I suspect at least one member of the NomCom would have resigned rather than go along with it. More likely, they were following the process they were asked to perform to the best of their ability, and that process resulted in qualified candidates being disqualified on some technicality. The problem is that the process is entirely black-box, with very little transparency. The best we can hope for this time around is that the Board investigates what happens and makes some form of statement after the petition process is complete as to what they found.

Looking forward, I believe that the process needs to be reformed to be less completely opaque, and to provide mechanisms for the NomCom to provide feedback, to the candidates, the board, and the public, as to their reasons whenever they choose not to place nominated candidates on the ballot. Several suggestions have already been made on how that could be done, and I know others are considering other mechanisms. I look forward to seeing the board candidates' (and existing board members') positions on how they intend to balance transparency with the need for privacy in reviewing candidates' backgrounds.

In any event, those solutions must by necessity be applied to future elections, not to the current situation. The recourse for the current situation (for ARIN members) is simply to support the petitions and then vote in the election.

-Scott


On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 7:18 PM Michael B. Williams <Michael.Williams at glexia.com<mailto:Michael.Williams at glexia.com>> wrote:
Is NomCom able to explain how this happened? In my opinion, unless they cannot offer some credible explanation everyone on NomCom should be removed from any position of official power at ARIN. Embarrassing to say the least.

________________________________
Michael B. Williams
Glexia - An IT Company
Legal Notice:
The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's confidential business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful.



On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 1:35 PM Jason Baugher <jasonbaugher at adamstel.com<mailto:jasonbaugher at adamstel.com>> wrote:
I signed the petitions to get these 2 candidates on the ballot, because unless someone on the nom-com cares to give us a valid reason to reject them, I feel they belong there.

I also answered the survey regarding the prioritization of question, choosing those that address the nom-com and overall behavior and makeup of the board to be the most important.

Up until a few years ago, I paid little attention to ARIN governance and policy. What was in place didn’t affect me adversely, so I didn’t read the new policy announcements, didn’t care who was running things, didn’t even bother to vote quite honestly. It wasn’t until the somewhat recent waiting list policy change fiasco that I started making a point of following what is happening with ARIN.

With that said, I consider myself somewhat of an outsider, so I may be over-simplifying things. However, this is how I’m interpreting this process.
1: The Board selects a nominating committee, which then has the authority to accept or reject candidates from the ballot.
2: The nominating committee is insulated in as such that they don’t have to provide their reasons for accepting or rejecting the candidate, even to the candidate themselves.
3: The only recourse is for the person to file a petition to get 124 member orgs to sign to be forced onto the ballot, which is a hurdle that those already accepted by the nominating committee do not have pass.
4: The end-result would appear to be a limited selection on the ballot of people hand-picked by the existing Board, thereby ensuring the overall direction of the Board stays the same.

Someone else already suggested a reform to the system above, where the nom-com would have to provide their reasons for rejection, which I fully support. I’d also suggest that if there is going to be a 2% petition requirement to be on the ballot, it should be for all candidates, not just for those who the nom-com rejects. Level the playing field.

Jason

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> On Behalf Of Scott Leibrand
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 8:20 PM
To: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway

CAUTION: This email is from OUTSIDE our organization.
Please do not open/download any attachment or click any link unless you know it's safe.
In light of the public and private responses I’ve gotten to this question, it seems that the obvious explanations are considered far more credible than any innocent ones (of which none have been forthcoming this far).

I would encourage everyone to support these petitions, to solicit candidates’ opinions on the matter of candidate selection, and then vote for candidates willing to publicly advocate for candidate selection reform at ARIN. Whether or not the process is currently undergoing capture, it certainly appears to lack the transparency needed to avoid it.

Scott

On Oct 9, 2021, at 5:37 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com<mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
There were apparently at least 5 candidates. There are 2 open board seats.

The nom-com approved only 3 candidates, hence my complaint.

There are 7 open advisory council seats. I did not count the nomination list size, but I assure you it was well short of 14.

Owen


On Oct 9, 2021, at 17:30 , Steven Ryerse <SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com<mailto:SRyerse at eclipse-networks.com>> wrote:

If there are enough candidates there ought to be at least 2 for each seat and more than 2 is also good too.


Steven Ryerse
President

sryerse at eclipse-networks.com<mailto:sryerse at eclipse-networks.com> | C: 770.656.1460
100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338

<image001.jpg><https://www.facebook.com/EclipseNetworks/>  <image002.jpg><https://www.linkedin.com/company/eclipse-networks-inc/>  <image003.jpg><https://twitter.com/NetworksEclipse>  <image004.jpg><https://www.instagram.com/eclipsenetworks/>

<image005.png><https://www.eclipse-networks.com/>
<image006.png><image007.png>

From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net>> On Behalf Of Mike Burns
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 4:45 PM
To: Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com<mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>>
Cc: arin-ppml <arin-ppml at arin.net<mailto:arin-ppml at arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway

I was rejected for an Advisory Council candidacy even though I was a candidate in the past and am a policy author in multiple registries.
Another broker was likewise rejected.
There are 7 AC openings, only 10 candidates, but I was rejected.
I know another broker who was, like me, solicited to run but then denied a candidacy.
The NomCom is comprised of four insiders, two volunteers, and operates in the dark.
Not saying this is the case, but very few likeminded individuals on the AC/Board can effectively capture these via NomCom filtering.
A dangerous thing for Internet governance in the context of Afrinic. I don't want the governments of the world taking over from the amateurs.
But if we continue to act amateurish...


Regards,
Mike



---- On Sat, 09 Oct 2021 11:58:00 -0400 Scott Leibrand <scottleibrand at gmail.com<mailto:scottleibrand at gmail.com>> wrote ----

Has ARIN disclosed anything about why the NomCom chose to exclude two obviously-qualified candidates from the ballot when they didn’t yet have 2 candidates per open seat, and the 3 candidates they did include are all less well-known to the community than both the ones they excluded?

I can hypothesize some possible reasons, but none of them would reflect well on the NomCom, so I am reluctant to do so without learning their stated reason(s).

Scott

> On Oct 9, 2021, at 7:39 AM, Bill Woodcock <woody at pch.net<mailto:woody at pch.net>> wrote:
> 
>
>> On Oct 9, 2021, at 4:03 PM, Martin Hannigan <hannigan at gmail.com<mailto:hannigan at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> There's a petition for two people to be added to the Trustee ballot after being rejected by the nom com.
>
> Yes! Go vote on the petitions, so you’ll have more than three choices to fill the two open board seats, when the election comes. Give yourself more options.
>
> -Bill
>
> _______________________________________________
> ARIN-PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
> Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.



CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.


Jason Baugher, Network Operations Manager
405 Emminga Road | PO Box 217 | Golden, IL 62339-0217
P:(217) 696-4411 | F:(217) 696-4811 | www.adams.net<http://www.adams.net/>
[Adams-Logo]<http://adams.net/>
________________________________
The information contained in this email message is PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL, and is intended for the use of the addressee and no one else. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute, reproduce or use this email message (or the attachments) and notify the sender of the mistaken transmission. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net<mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.

_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML at arin.net<mailto:ARIN-PPML at arin.net>).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact info at arin.net<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/20211013/aefd65c7/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the ARIN-PPML mailing list