AOP Notification

[Karl Auerbach]

> > As an aside, I am somewhat concerned that two of the proposed BoT members
> > are employees of NSI
> 
> I do not understand your concern.  Maybe this is another misunderstanding.

> So I am confused by your expression of concern.  Please deconfuse me (no
> sarcastic remarks:-).

I'll try, and without sarcasm and with an intention to be constructive.

One of my purposes in pointing these things out is that I think that if
these issues are answered now, when things are still flexible and when the
reasons for a choice are still fresh and not-forgotten, ARIN will be in a
better position to answer similar questions later.  The AOL situation with
the lawsuits has got me really concerned that it's worthwhile to endure a
painful debate now in order to get some stability later; the users out
there are getting feisty.

> An NSI management person is on the board because NSI is putting a lot of
> money in.  My experience has been that, while a startup is using someone's
> cash, that entity usually has a seat on the board.

Yes, that is a valid point.  (Assuming, of course, that it is clearly
NSI's money and not money from the 30% being witheld from domain name
fees.)

This does raise the ancillary question -- If the NSI representation is
to ensure that the money is spent "properly", then what is the definition
of "properly"?  There is a lot of room here for suspicious minds (or some
of us who have had unfortunate experiences in real-life business) to have
concern. 

This is really hard to write about without inadvertent shadows on the
individuals involved.  I want to assure them that doing so is not my
intent or desire.

Let's look at the specific case of the CEO of NSI being on the BoT of
ARIN.  As CEO it's his legal obligation to care for the interests of NSI
and it's shareholders.  Each BoT member has a legal obligation towards
ARIN and its constitutients.   At times these will come into conflict,
often in subtle ways.  It's going to be a tough line to walk, and is only
going to be made more difficult when there is a presumption at the outset
that the NSI CEO is there to "ensure that NSI's money is properly spent".

		--karl--