Hi Skeeve I’m sure you wouldn’t do that, though. The Secretariat could add more stringent registration requirements into Confer, or use an off-the-shelf or online election platform. The question would always be convenience versus validity.
I internally raised the potential for somebody to game the system purely to take advantage of the new travel support for SIG Chairs and so, at APNIC 41 Paul Wilson suggested the community might want to review the procedures to make sure they are comfortable with the new situation. Just to be clear, the Secretariat has no preference, opinion, or objective in the outcome of this discussion. So don’t take anything I say to be an endorsement of any outcome. Adam >>>> On 6/09/2016, 10:18, "Skeeve Stevens" >>>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: This is worrying re Confer as I am quite sure I could register 100,000 people with unique addresses. We've entered a new era of bots - this would not be hard. ...Skeeve Skeeve Stevens - Senior IP Broker v4Now - an eintellego Networks service [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; www.v4now.com<http://www.v4now.com/> Phone: 1300 239 038; Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 ; skype://skeeve facebook.com/v4now<http://facebook.com/v4now> ; linkedin.com/in/skeeve<http://linkedin.com/in/skeeve> twitter.com/theispguy<http://twitter.com/theispguy> ; blog: www.theispguy.com<http://www.theispguy.com/> ; Keybase: https://keybase.io/skeeve [mage removed by sender.] IP Address Brokering - Introducing sellers and buyers On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Adam Gosling <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Hi Randy >>>> On 5/09/2016, 20:52, "Randy Bush" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> >>>> wrote: >> [ this is address policy? ] No this is not address policy. The SIG Guidelines are the rules of procedure for all SIGs. The proposal was also sent to the other SIG mailing lists, but will be discussed in the Policy SIG as there is more agenda time there. >> Secondary, it can be used by fraud, like hijacking the position of >> Chair agaist the Community by inviting many persons who never attend >> the community discussion. >> ... >> I would like to propose limiting eligible voters of SIG Chair election >> to registered participants of APNIC Conference where the election is >> held. >> >> In this context, registered participants include remote participants >> who register to Confer, or its successor in future. is there an unstated assumption that many persons could attend the meeting who are not registered locally or remotely? does that assumption hold? The Secretariat doesn’t physically check registrations at the door to the Policy SIG sessions, I guess a bunch of extra people could wander in without badges. I’m not sure if we would notice. At present remote participation (using the CONFER tool) only requires a simple registration with unique email address. We tried more stringent registration procedures with the Webcasting (like ARIN) and got a lot of negative feedback. > I would like to propose aligning Chair' term with Co-Chair's term, > which means that Chair and all Co-Chair will serve for same two years. could make for a tough transition if both are replaced at the same time. randy * sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy * _______________________________________________ sig-policy mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.apnic.net/mailman/listinfo/sig-policy
