Hello, This morning's email announcing the opening of the nominations period for Board of Trustees seats has me stewing on a topic that's bothered me for a while.
What fair and objective data does a voter have to judge how well an incumbent is doing? I have been involved with ARIN in various capacities since 1999 and pay a LOT of attention. But in most cases, I can't tell you how good a Board member is. I suspect that's because so much of our activity as the collective ARIN happens in the policy making arena, and the Board has chosen to be mostly silent in that arena. At our April meeting in San Francisco, I saw a Board member sit silent for the entire 3 days. Before that member was on the board, however, he was a strong, productive, effective advocate for good policy who earned my vote. Now he's silent. What am I supposed to think now when he runs for re-election? How do I judge if he's earned another term? I read the published minutes of the Board meetings, and they're not particularly enlightening. Does the Board Does the Board conduct any reviews or evaluations of Board member performance? Is any of that available to the members? I mean, the CEO gets reviewed, yes? If the Board can review the CEO, would it be a stretch to ask for reviews of the other 6 members of the Board? David David R Huberman Principal, Global IP Addressing Microsoft Corporation _______________________________________________ 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: http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.
