Hi Leif,
Thanks for your input.
I think your suggestion for transparency should be discussed along with
other suggestions in some kind of organized process.
After all, addressing your suggestion here may be an inappropriate venue.
It seems like that is the current ARIN position.
Maybe we can give ARIN's board a little time to come up with a definitive
answer about where this discussion should take place.
And then we can get into the meat of it and perhaps we can even get some
direct and timely feedback from the Board.
Regards,
Mike
From: Leif Sawyer <lsaw...@gci.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2021 4:44 PM
To: arin-ppml@arin.net
Cc: Mike Burns <m...@iptrading.com>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] ARIN Announces the Final Slate of Candidates for
the 2021 ARIN Elections
Mike -
Speaking only as myself, and not as a member of the AC or the NomCom:
I hear your frustrations for transparency, and I have formulated a
suggestion that I've shared with the NomCom to improve the way that
candidate responses are handled.
To wit -
I've suggested simple, impartial, boilerplate language that would be used
for all candidates, to show where those candidates were marked as "needing
additional improvement"
Examples of those areas were:
ethics, business, governance, communication, finance, and education
There is obviously room for other areas. I'd love to hear what your
thoughts would be.
Thanks,
Leif Sawyer
_______________________________________________
ARIN-PPML
You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to
the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net).
Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml
Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
