when & how could policy be changed (was) Re: past vs future use

[Randy Bush]

> Yet I have the impression that the arin board feels that it cannot make
> *any* policy moves on its own now because they might not be representative
> of what the membership will really want.

While I can not contest that you may have that impression, I believe you
mis-state the ARIN BofT's motivations.  This is my perception, absent
discussion with other members:

  o It has not been shown that the discussion on these lists represents any
    industry consensus.  In fact, there is belief by some non-trivial
    players in the industry that it really represents only a vocal minority.
    Note that we do not hear from a significant number of the players.

    If anyone here can ascertain what the future ARIN membership might want
    amid the posturing, screaming, whining, red herrings, and predominantly
    clue-free garbage on these lists, they could much better spend their
    fantastic talents on world peace rather than internet addresses.

  o The BofT has been a weensie bit occupied with just getting this puppy
    off the ground in a straight line.  While deviations from course might
    appear very interesting, rightly or wrongly, they get viewed with more
    suspicion than one hopes they will once we have progressed just a wee
    bit further than one week along.

  o The BofT is hesitant to make policy changes on its own because of the
    precedent it will set.  Note that this is quite different from your
    conjecture.  "Those evil bastards changed policy behind closed doors
    when they had promised that members, ..."

    Now, if it were a very much needed and 'one obvious way to do it right'
    change, maybe the BofT would feel the need for precipitous action.  But
    that would not describe the current circumstances.

  o One can fight fires or one can build systems to deal with them.  If you
    spend your energy on the former, you will be doing it forever.  If you
    spend it on the latter, this month's problems will fall into perspective
    in six months.

    And note that the policies you are trying to address are not new this
    week and the solutions are not no-brainers or without controversy,
    except to those with large axes to grind.

So, I am sorry to be an apologist for inaction, but that seems wisest at the
moment.  And I definitely do not mean to imply that the problem is not
important.  

But I also note how few constructive answers I have received to queries on
how certain policy problems might be addressed when we have the mechanisms
to do so.

randy