Cast /all/ your votes in favor of the petition for both candidates. On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 01:42 Michael B. Williams via ARIN-PPML < [email protected]> wrote:
> Whatever it is I don’t want a repeat of this again so let me know what I > am able to do to help! > > On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 16:39 Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I suspect they were given board guidance that lead to this unfortunate >> and undesirable action. >> >> Owen >> >> >> On Oct 11, 2021, at 20:08 , Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> The members of the NomCom aren't allowed to make public statements like >> that about the private proceedings of the NomCom. Given the NomCom is made >> up of individuals that many of us know personally and highly respect, I >> think it is unlikely that they acted with any ill intent. And if some >> members of the NomCom were attempting to disqualify individuals for >> political reasons or anything like that, I suspect at least one member of >> the NomCom would have resigned rather than go along with it. More likely, >> they were following the process they were asked to perform to the best of >> their ability, and that process resulted in qualified candidates being >> disqualified on some technicality. The problem is that the process is >> entirely black-box, with very little transparency. The best we can hope for >> this time around is that the Board investigates what happens and makes some >> form of statement after the petition process is complete as to what they >> found. >> >> Looking forward, I believe that the process needs to be reformed to be >> less completely opaque, and to provide mechanisms for the NomCom to provide >> feedback, to the candidates, the board, and the public, as to their reasons >> whenever they choose not to place nominated candidates on the ballot. >> Several suggestions have already been made on how that could be done, and I >> know others are considering other mechanisms. I look forward to seeing the >> board candidates' (and existing board members') positions on how they >> intend to balance transparency with the need for privacy in reviewing >> candidates' backgrounds. >> >> In any event, those solutions must by necessity be applied to future >> elections, not to the current situation. The recourse for the current >> situation (for ARIN members) is simply to support the petitions and then >> vote in the election. >> >> -Scott >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 7:18 PM Michael B. Williams < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Is NomCom able to explain how this happened? In my opinion, unless they >>> cannot offer some credible explanation everyone on NomCom should be removed >>> from any position of official power at ARIN. Embarrassing to say the least. >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> *Michael B. Williams * >>> Glexia - An IT Company >>> Legal Notice: >>> The information in this electronic mail message is the sender's >>> confidential business and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely >>> for the addressee(s). Access to this internet electronic mail message by >>> anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any >>> disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be >>> taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 1:35 PM Jason Baugher <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I signed the petitions to get these 2 candidates on the ballot, because >>>> unless someone on the nom-com cares to give us a valid reason to reject >>>> them, I feel they belong there. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I also answered the survey regarding the prioritization of question, >>>> choosing those that address the nom-com and overall behavior and makeup of >>>> the board to be the most important. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Up until a few years ago, I paid little attention to ARIN governance >>>> and policy. What was in place didn’t affect me adversely, so I didn’t read >>>> the new policy announcements, didn’t care who was running things, didn’t >>>> even bother to vote quite honestly. It wasn’t until the somewhat recent >>>> waiting list policy change fiasco that I started making a point of >>>> following what is happening with ARIN. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> With that said, I consider myself somewhat of an outsider, so I may be >>>> over-simplifying things. However, this is how I’m interpreting this >>>> process. >>>> >>>> 1: The Board selects a nominating committee, which then has the >>>> authority to accept or reject candidates from the ballot. >>>> >>>> 2: The nominating committee is insulated in as such that they don’t >>>> have to provide their reasons for accepting or rejecting the candidate, >>>> even to the candidate themselves. >>>> >>>> 3: The only recourse is for the person to file a petition to get 124 >>>> member orgs to sign to be forced onto the ballot, which is a hurdle that >>>> those already accepted by the nominating committee do not have pass. >>>> >>>> 4: The end-result would appear to be a limited selection on the ballot >>>> of people hand-picked by the existing Board, thereby ensuring the overall >>>> direction of the Board stays the same. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Someone else already suggested a reform to the system above, where the >>>> nom-com would have to provide their reasons for rejection, which I fully >>>> support. I’d also suggest that if there is going to be a 2% petition >>>> requirement to be on the ballot, it should be for all candidates, not just >>>> for those who the nom-com rejects. Level the playing field. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jason >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Scott >>>> Leibrand >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 9, 2021 8:20 PM >>>> *To:* arin-ppml <[email protected]> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> CAUTION: This email is from *OUTSIDE* our organization. >>>> Please do not open/download any attachment or click any link unless you >>>> know it's safe. >>>> >>>> In light of the public and private responses I’ve gotten to this >>>> question, it seems that the obvious explanations are considered far more >>>> credible than any innocent ones (of which none have been forthcoming this >>>> far). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I would encourage everyone to support these petitions, to solicit >>>> candidates’ opinions on the matter of candidate selection, and then vote >>>> for candidates willing to publicly advocate for candidate selection reform >>>> at ARIN. Whether or not the process is currently undergoing capture, it >>>> certainly appears to lack the transparency needed to avoid it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 9, 2021, at 5:37 PM, Owen DeLong <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> There were apparently at least 5 candidates. There are 2 open board >>>> seats. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The nom-com approved only 3 candidates, hence my complaint. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> There are 7 open advisory council seats. I did not count the nomination >>>> list size, but I assure you it was well short of 14. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Owen >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 9, 2021, at 17:30 , Steven Ryerse <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If there are enough candidates there ought to be at least 2 for each >>>> seat and more than 2 is also good too. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Steven Ryerse* >>>> >>>> President >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *[email protected] <[email protected]>* | *C*: >>>> 770.656.1460 >>>> >>>> 100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338 >>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/100+Ashford+Center+North+%7C+Suite+110+%7C+Atlanta,+Georgia+30338?entry=gmail&source=g> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <image001.jpg> <https://www.facebook.com/EclipseNetworks/> >>>> <image002.jpg> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/eclipse-networks-inc/> >>>> <image003.jpg> <https://twitter.com/NetworksEclipse> <image004.jpg> >>>> <https://www.instagram.com/eclipsenetworks/> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <image005.png> <https://www.eclipse-networks.com/> >>>> >>>> <image006.png><image007.png> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* ARIN-PPML <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of *Mike >>>> Burns >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, October 9, 2021 4:45 PM >>>> *To:* Scott Leibrand <[email protected]> >>>> *Cc:* arin-ppml <[email protected]> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I was rejected for an Advisory Council candidacy even though I was a >>>> candidate in the past and am a policy author in multiple registries. >>>> >>>> Another broker was likewise rejected. >>>> >>>> There are 7 AC openings, only 10 candidates, but I was rejected. >>>> >>>> I know another broker who was, like me, solicited to run but then >>>> denied a candidacy. >>>> >>>> The NomCom is comprised of four insiders, two volunteers, and operates >>>> in the dark. >>>> >>>> Not saying this is the case, but very few likeminded individuals on the >>>> AC/Board can effectively capture these via NomCom filtering. >>>> >>>> A dangerous thing for Internet governance in the context of Afrinic. I >>>> don't want the governments of the world taking over from the amateurs. >>>> >>>> But if we continue to act amateurish... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Mike >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---- On Sat, 09 Oct 2021 11:58:00 -0400 *Scott Leibrand >>>> <[email protected] <[email protected]>>* wrote ---- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Has ARIN disclosed anything about why the NomCom chose to exclude two >>>> obviously-qualified candidates from the ballot when they didn’t yet have 2 >>>> candidates per open seat, and the 3 candidates they did include are all >>>> less well-known to the community than both the ones they excluded? >>>> >>>> I can hypothesize some possible reasons, but none of them would reflect >>>> well on the NomCom, so I am reluctant to do so without learning their >>>> stated reason(s). >>>> >>>> Scott >>>> >>>> > On Oct 9, 2021, at 7:39 AM, Bill Woodcock <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > >>>> >> On Oct 9, 2021, at 4:03 PM, Martin Hannigan <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> There's a petition for two people to be added to the Trustee ballot >>>> after being rejected by the nom com. >>>> > >>>> > Yes! Go vote on the petitions, so you’ll have more than three choices >>>> to fill the two open board seats, when the election comes. Give yourself >>>> more options. >>>> > >>>> > -Bill >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > 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. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *CAUTION:* This email originated from outside the organization. Do not >>>> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know >>>> the content is safe. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Jason Baugher, Network Operations Manager* >>>> 405 Emminga Road >>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/405+Emminga+Road?entry=gmail&source=g> >>>> | PO Box 217 | Golden, IL 62339-0217 >>>> P:(217) 696-4411 | F:(217) 696-4811 | *www.adams.net* >>>> <http://www.adams.net/> >>>> [image: Adams-Logo] <http://adams.net/> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> The information contained in this email message is PRIVILEGED AND >>>> CONFIDENTIAL, and is intended for the use of the addressee and no one else. >>>> If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, distribute, >>>> reproduce or use this email message (or the attachments) and notify the >>>> sender of the mistaken transmission. Thank you. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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. >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> 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. >> >> >> -- > Sent from Gmail Mobile > _______________________________________________ > 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. >
_______________________________________________ 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.
