Yes we are, mainly when there are tentatives to push something that
hasn't been broadly accepted by the community as many other proposals
that didn't progress.
If a proposal doesn't reach consensus is probably because it didn't
resolve all the possible issues it had during the discussion period
regardless of how many people supported it.
And by the way: there are absolutely nothing wrong in dismissing
supports when they have no substantial justifications to contribute to
resolve the opened issues. That's what is evaluated by the AC.
Otherwise we may end up having supports to proposals "because once the
person visited the author's company and they give free beers to visitors".
Process keep being bottom-up, everyone is free to write whatever opinion
they have and others that don't agree with it or don't consider that as
something that resolves opened issues have also the right to contradict
them.
Fernando
On 15/01/2021 17:21, Mike Burns wrote:
Count me as embarrassed at the treatment of new posters on this list.
Demeaned as recipients of payments for expressing their opinion,
mocked for offering support without establishing bona fides.
Dismissed because no reasoning is provided in support of their opinions.
And finally attacked when they do.
I hope the Trustees who will make this decision are aware of the
importance of bottom-up, stakeholder governance, and realize these
numerous expressions of support might be the first steps of these
posters towards the kind of ongoing community participation we claim
to value.
Aren’t we all sick of the same voices?
Regards,
Mike Burns
PS ARIN does not require resource holders use NAT, much less CGNAT.
If you feel that should be a requirement, write a policy proposal.
*From:* ARIN-PPML <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> *On Behalf Of *Robert
Clarke
*Sent:* Friday, January 15, 2021 2:55 PM
*To:* Jay Wendelin <j...@poweredbystl.com>
*Cc:* arin-ppml@arin.net
*Subject:* Re: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2020-2: Grandfathering of
Organizations Removed from Waitlist by Implementation of ARIN-2019-16
Isn't this like saying "please give me free land so I can lease it
onto schools and other noble public institutions?"
I don't feel like this argument has weight nor does your business take
priority over the actual non profit businesses that won't get
allocations because of this policy.
Regards,
Robert
On Jan 15, 2021, at 8:29 AM, Jay Wendelin <j...@poweredbystl.com
<mailto:j...@poweredbystl.com>> wrote:
I support this petition, I have many Public School Clients that
rely on their ISP’s to manage and offer IP address.
_______________________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
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.
