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.