Dear David,
I strongly support this policy, so how`s this policy going on ? Anyone can tell
me ?
Best Regards,
Ernest TsePacswitch Globe Telecom Ltd.// Web: http://www.pacswitch.com// Tel:
+852-21570550//Mobile: +852-62536678//Skype: codesixs
On Wed, 01/03/2017 18.50, Lu Heng <[email protected]> wrote:
>
Dear Community,
I am sending this letter at the best wishes for future stable growth and
peaceful discussion.
>
My colleague David proposed the policy No Need in APNIC region. The discussion
went fairly well, until a point when Adam rose up and declared that the CONFER
system was being gamed, he was clearly and understandably emotional.
>
But, in the manner he did that, as the company who are proposing the policy
ware receiving overwhelming support in the CONFER system at the time he made
the declaration, understandably putting us the top suspect for gaming the
system.
This is not acceptable, and admittedly, it makes me emotionally unhappy, David
is making a policy proposal to try to improve certain aspect of IP pool
management for the whole APNIC community and it is now implied that he is part
of a rigged policy making process.
>
>
This clearly is not good for us or for anyone else.
>
>
I had words with APNIC staff shortly after the session closed, and got further
accusations to be part of gaming the system, which further aggravated me, now
the accusation was direct.
>
While I point out that the amount of people supporting the policy wasn’t just 3
or 4 in the room, one of APNIC Staff said direct to my face that he does not
believe me, as I was lying, while I suggesting we can go to the hallway and
confront people who ware just supported the policy during the process to future
confirm the actually number of support, to check the fact of each of our claim.
he simply asked me to get out of his face, literally, “get out of my face”.
As a member of this community and regular attendee to the meetings, I will have
to say the behavior of staff was less than acceptable, accusations thrown in
like this must be backed up or you just destroy someone's reputation without
any proof!
>
If the system was being gamed, it must be announced in a manner that put no one
in doubt.
If the system was simply less than perfect, works not as intended, it should
simply be announced as a trial run and we need to fix the system.
>
In any case, accusation that serious, or even doubt that serious(as Adam was
ask me directly if I gamed the system), need to be backed with hard solicit
evidence.
Both as company and individual, we value our reputation in the community
dearly, we are trying to contribute to the community not in our own interest,
but in the interest of many, before we proposed the policy, we have discussed
it with many members of APNIC, friends in the community, that many of them
think it is a good path to move forward with.
>
While waiting for the solicit evidence the system was gamed to absolutely clear
our name and reputation, I would like ask APNIC being future careful in
implementing such less than perfect system for such sensitive discussion.
>
* sig-policy: APNIC SIG on resource management policy
*
> _______________________________________________
> sig-policy mailing list
> [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
