<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">My statement that what you are doing border on ad hominem has nothing to do with contrary to my thinking. I that to do with the fact that you are basically calling into question the character of an AC candidate and a sitting AC member without regard for the record presented by either one of them in terms of their participation in this community.<div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div>On Oct 26, 2023, at 11:27, Fernando Frediani <fhfrediani@gmail.com> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div><p>Hi Owen<br>
It is good that this is just your own opinion. You are entitled to
it of course.<br>
<br>
Of course they seek to abide by ARIN policies and pay fees
otherwise their need don't move. They don't have any other choice.
But it is not hard to think if they had enough power to change
policies in order to make their business more easy and with less
"blocks" caused by good policies developed by experienced people
with major interest in the community needs, to exist fairness in
resource allocation and that everyone is served reasonably and
equally regardless their size and how much money they have do you
really think they would refrain from doing that ? It is not
because maybe a single person wasn't able to move forward things
that are beneficial to a minority and to specific business because
he/she didn't have enough votes or support that he/she or them
would not do if they had. In my view is naive to think most would
balance well community interests and an specific business
interest.</p><p>Regarding the ad hominem attacks thing please just refrain from
saying this every time someone say anything that bothers reading
and contrary to your own thinking. I ask you to make an effort to
separate a mere annoyance and endeavor to put arguments to defend
your points and the discussion can continue fine. <br>
</p><p>Regards<br>
Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 26/10/2023 15:06, Owen DeLong wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:B6EDE2F7-B84A-4DD0-8270-4D80B6AF7673@delong.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<br id="lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage">
<div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Oct 26, 2023, at 09:49, Fernando Frediani
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:fhfrediani@gmail.com"><fhfrediani@gmail.com></a> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div><p>The very existence of PPML is a block and problem for
IP brokers to freely do business due to the restrictions
policies developed here impact their ability to do
whatever their wish to fit to their customer needs.<br>
Last time I saw a IP broker representative speaking to
an audience he said with no shame that it was necessary
to remove necessity to justify for the resources in
order to do a transfers. Does anyone really believes
that such person seating on the AC would be able to
balance community interests and his pay checker
interests ?</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
I believe that it has already been proven that this is possible.
I will not name the person, though anyone paying attention can
probably identify her easily. I hope she will not be upset that
I singled her out. Nonetheless, we have had at least one AC
member who worked for an address broker at the beginning of her
time on the AC and for a substantial time thereafter. IMHO she
served with distinction and honor throughout. I am sorry to see
that she is not running for re-election.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>We didn’t always agree, but I have no doubt that she
represented the community honestly and with distinction
throughout.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><p>In some way the greedy to freely trade with IP
resources lead to a sad and going history of fraud and
dismount of an organization like AfriNic and guess what
? AfriNic was just trying to impose the current policy
developed by the community when it all started.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
In fact, the situation in AFRINIC has very little to do with the
greed of a broker and significantly more to do with failure by
the registry to follow its own governing documents.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>For example, consider that there’s a ~8 million address
discrepancy between what AFRINIC claims is in their free pool
and what should be remaining according to Geoff Huston’s
statistics based on their published allocation data.</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><p>So when someone say they bring a lot of experience I
kind of agree, but experience that they have learned in
order to push their own business ahead despite any
community interest involved, nothing else.<br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>I don’t think that’s a valid assumption to make about
everyone that works for every address broker and frankly, I
think your statements border on ad hominem attacks.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><div> <br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><p>Of course I am not willing throw stones on these actors
and I know and have a good relationship with some that
are serious and are really interested in facilitating
transfers, but in general I am not naive to see very
much good intentions towards the community interests
from them to this and other Policy Development Forums.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>You pretty much already have, so that statement is
laughable.</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><p>Therefore yes, any person affiliated to IP broker
should be seen as a high conflict of interest.</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>Disagreeing with the community isn’t inherently a conflict
of interest. A conflict exists when a person is essentially
beholden to two masters whose interests are in conflict.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>While there are some scenarios where a broker might be at
odds with ARIN, this is not inherently the case. Indeed, ARIN
maintains a list of brokers that have agreed to abide by ARIN
policies and paid fees to ARIN in order to be listed as
transfer facilitators.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>That’s not a conflict, that’s working together
harmoniously, even if you don’t like the result.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Owen</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<div><p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 26/10/2023 13:15, William
Herrin wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAP-guGX6wjccNEp2j1d0LRdSjn1KDfT2-AsQb00kUYvvvcvrGA@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 8:42 AM Adam Thompson <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:athompson@merlin.mb.ca" moz-do-not-send="true"><athompson@merlin.mb.ca></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I don't agree that an IP broker *inherently* has a problematic
conflict of interest with ARIN, any more than every ARIN
member on the AC has some degree of inherent conflict of interest.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Hi Adam,
The IP broker's core business directly overlaps with the registry's
function. -Of course- there's a substantial conflict of interest.
Many folks deeply versed in the issues relevant to ARIN will have jobs
that offer some conflict of interest. They represent their companies
before ARIN. But the broker's or "leaser's" is the most substantial of
all -- it's their *core* business.
That doesn't necessarily mean they should be rejected as candidates.
After all, they bring a wealth of relevant experience. But at an
absolute minimum, their conflict of interest statement should
demonstrate a clear understanding of their situation. Someone who
doesn't understand the character of his or her conflict of interest
has no place on the board.
Regards,
Bill Herrin
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
ARIN-PPML<br>
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net">ARIN-PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml">https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml</a><br>
Please contact <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>ARIN-PPML<br>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to<br>the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).<br>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:<br>https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml<br>Please contact info@arin.net if you experience any issues.<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>