On Wed, May 1, 2019 at 12:12 AM Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > To be clear to all those that are supporting this as a discussion petition… > It is not. > It is a petition to have the board of trustees reconsider the determination > by the AC that > the proposal was out of scope of the PDP.
Exactly; there is no such thing as a "discussion petition"; the PPML is not restricted to discussions about pending proposals ---- If anything; a petition succeeding tends to pause discussion, as there is now a live proposal for the BoT and AC to meet and work on, before those results are known -- we will not know what if any proposal language is live within the context of discussion. The petition process is also not a method capable of modifying or appealing the PDP or NRPM's scope -- with prop266 so much of this proposal's language is out of scope objectively and factually, that at this point we are simply waiting on the BoT to review this and confirm that the AC is in fact correct in their evaluation... On the other hand, there could be other methods pursued for "discussion" such as a new policy proposal COMPLIANT with the NRPM's scope or new suggestions under ACSP. -- -JH _______________________________________________ ARIN-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: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact [email protected] if you experience any issues.
