On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:15 PM, William Herrin <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > I haven't seen any responses for a couple days, so here's the current count:
First of all this is not a vote, and while I appreciate you're attempts to help (I assume), they come across as a manipulative attempt at controlling the conversation when the counts are not accurate and are (repeatedly) preemptive. Further, I really appreciate your opinion on this topic (and all others) but we have all heard it multiple times in a thread where I asked for a single response to allow others to participate. Your assistance is not needed, thanks any way, you can stop now. Cheers, ~Chris > On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Chris Grundemann <[email protected]> > wrote: >> 1) Do you support the principle of efficient utilization based on need >> (Conservation/Sustainability)? > > 7 of 20 respondents in favor, 12 opposed, 1 did not offer an answer > that could be interpreted as support or opposition. > > 17 of 20 respondents used language that could reasonably be > interpreted as supporting sustainable allocation as a principle, > independent of the "needs" question. 1 offered language opposed. > > 9 respondents could be reasonably understood to favor > conservation as a principle. 4 were opposed. > > >> 2) Do you support the principle of hierarchical aggregation (Routability)? > > 5 of 20 respondents favor, 14 of 20 oppose heirarchy, aggregation or > both as a principle but are not necessarily against its current > practice. > > 17 of 20 used various language to express a view that supporting > routing scalability is an appropriate principle. 2 offered the view > that ARIN activity should not be informed by routing issues. > > >> 3) Do you support the principle of uniqueness (Registration)? > > 19 of 20 favor. 0 oppose. > >> 4) Do you support the goal of balancing these principles with each >> other under the overarching principle of Stewardship? > > 8 of 20 support, 10 of 20 oppose, 2 non-answers. Most answers were > nuanced such that the yeses were conditional on the respondent's > unique interpretation of the word stewardship and the no's were along > the lines of "define this better." > > > > I also read the report from the recent policy consultation. Only one > person not affiliated with ARIN spoke, and he offered questions, not > answers. If the show of hands count was published, I missed it. > > Regards, > Bill Herrin > > > -- > William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] > 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> > Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 > > > -- > William D. Herrin ................ [email protected] [email protected] > 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> > Falls Church, VA 22042-3004 > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues. -- @ChrisGrundemann http://chrisgrundemann.com _______________________________________________ PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List ([email protected]). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
