[arin-ppml] ARIN Announces the Final Slate of Candidates for the 2021 ARIN Elections
mike at iptrading.com
Tue Oct 19 17:13:19 EDT 2021
The Board and NomCom have to know that the nominating process lends itself to board capture.
It provides a safe and simple mechanism for that, requiring only a few people to execute.
That kind of vulnerability is not consistent with a mature governance regime.
Thank you Cathy, for sharing.
In my recent case of rejection, I never received any interview but perhaps that’s only for Board elections.
Still I am sure there is nothing adverse in my background and I also received no explanations from anybody.
Something is amiss and the Board should make a statement acknowledging problems in this cycle and undertaking specific processes to rectify things before the next cycle. Permission should be granted to discuss this here on the ppml, the Board should perform an investigation and make a report based on community input and inside information regarding changes to be considered.
From: ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-bounces at arin.net> On Behalf Of Cj Aronson
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 4:56 PM
To: Leif Sawyer <lsawyer at gci.com>
Cc: arin-ppml at arin.net
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN Announces the Final Slate of Candidates for the 2021 ARIN Elections
as someone who has been nominated twice and not chosen as a candidate I have asked for (in addition to transparency)
- The results of the background check of me that was done as part of the process
- The synopsis of the interview with the contractor who interviews candidates and gives a synopsis to the nomcom.
The interview with the consultant is new and who knows what that person tells the nomcom? The first time I was interviewed by the nomcom but was not told who was on the call that day. It was super weird.
These requests went unanswered by the nomcom. I got a "that's a good suggestion I'll look into it" and then nothing.
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 2:44 PM Leif Sawyer <lsawyer at gci.com <mailto:lsawyer at gci.com> > wrote:
Speaking only as myself, and not as a member of the AC or the NomCom:
I hear your frustrations for transparency, and I have formulated a suggestion that I've shared with the NomCom to improve the way that candidate responses are handled.
To wit -
I've suggested simple, impartial, boilerplate language that would be used for all candidates, to show where those candidates were marked as "needing additional improvement"
Examples of those areas were:
ethics, business, governance, communication, finance, and education
There is obviously room for other areas. I'd love to hear what your thoughts would be.
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:
Please contact info at arin.net <mailto:info at arin.net> if you experience any issues.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML