Hello PPML participants, I have observed that the PPML discussions have become increasingly focused on election related items. As this is the forum for policy discussions, and the fact that we are in the middle of an election cycle, I would ask that the participants provide their election-related suggestions through the more appropriate avenues stated below. There are a variety of considerations that are being discussed, and in order to make sure they are properly catalogued and taken into due consideration for future election cycles, we have various avenues to provide such feedback that are more appropriate than PPML:
1) The General Members Mailing list; 2) Through the ARIN ACSP intake; and 3) Directly to electi...@arin.net ARIN may also seek community input after the elections are completed for feedback and suggestions on future election cycles; and given that there is so much discussion on this topic, that will definitely be taken into consideration. Thank you for the robust discussions and participation, -Michael -- Michael R. Abejuela General Counsel ARIN PO Box 232290 Centreville, VA 20120 (703) 227-9875 (p) (703) 263-0111 (f) mabeju...@arin.net <mailto:mabeju...@arin.net> On 10/27/23, 2:03 PM, "ARIN-PPML on behalf of Richard Laager" <arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net <mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net> on behalf of rlaa...@wiktel.com <mailto:rlaa...@wiktel.com>> wrote: On 2023-10-27 12:36, Leif Sawyer via ARIN-PPML wrote: > William Herrin <b...@herrin.us <mailto:b...@herrin.us>> writes: >> >> I believe that prior interaction with each segment of the community, >> outside of their duties as AC, should be a hard requirement for rating >> a candidate as "qualified" during the elections process. >> Quantitatively? Start with something simple: one policy-related post >> to PPML while not an AC member and you have to speak at the mike at >> least once at an ARIN meeting. Else you're rated "qualifications not >> demonstrated." > > Thank you for your suggestion and clarification, and I'll take it under > advisement. It might not be best to go from zero to hard requirement. In other words, _if_ this is being added as a thing that the NomCom should care about, I recommend starting with this being one of the factors that differentiates "Qualified" and "Well Qualified". If that works out and _if_ the desire is there to make it a hard requirement, that can be done a year or two later. I'm not currently expressing a position on whether this should be a factor to consider. I haven't given it enough thought. -- Richard _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net <mailto:ARIN-PPML@arin.net>). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml <https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml> Please contact i...@arin.net <mailto: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.
