I haven’t made this public and the NomCom knows my email
> address. Hit me up!
>
>
>
> I do hope it’s crystal clear to everybody.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* John Curran
> *Sent:* Friday, October 29, 2021 9:54 A
: Friday, October 29, 2021 9:54 AM
To: Mike Burns
Cc: john ; arin-ppml
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway
Mike -
For clarity, ARIN’s Election Processes are here -
https://www.arin.net/participate/oversight/elections/processes/
The current election process states that NomCom
From: John Curran
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2021 9:54 AM
To: Mike Burns
Cc: john ; arin-ppml
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway
Mike -
For clarity, ARIN’s Election Processes are here -
https://www.arin.net/participate/oversight/elections/processes/
The
Mike -
For clarity, ARIN’s Election Processes are here -
https://www.arin.net/participate/oversight/elections/processes/
The current election process states that NomCom Chair may prepare an
explanatory statement of the relevant factors regarding a nominee not included
on an election slate, and
"On the other hand, all rejected
nominees should be entitled to know the reasons privately, and simply asking
for
them does not imply such waiver."
Hi John,
I was rejected, never got a reason, whom do I simply ask?
(Just letting everybody know that it doesn't work that way currently.)
On 10/28/2021 4:47 PM, Chris Woodfield wrote:
First, I invite ARIN staff or Trustees to please advise if discussion of active
ASCP Suggestions is appropriate on PPML, and if not, please suggest an
alternative forum for doing so. Would arin-consult@ be a more appropriate place
for this discus
I do not believe that it is appropriate to discuss on PPML. But I can’t direct
you to arin-discuss so I’d suggest arin-consult would be the correct forum.
On the subject of arin-discuss: I believe the problem identified that the way
in which people had been subscribed to that list and how often
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 3:08 PM Joe Provo wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 08:08:04PM -0700, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> [snip]
> > Looking forward, I believe that the process needs to be reformed to be
> less
> > completely opaque, and to provide mechanisms for the NomCom to provide
> > feedback, to
First, I invite ARIN staff or Trustees to please advise if discussion of active
ASCP Suggestions is appropriate on PPML, and if not, please suggest an
alternative forum for doing so. Would arin-consult@ be a more appropriate place
for this discussion?
Reading both of these suggestions, I agree
On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 08:08:04PM -0700, Scott Leibrand wrote:
[snip]
> Looking forward, I believe that the process needs to be reformed to be less
> completely opaque, and to provide mechanisms for the NomCom to provide
> feedback, to the candidates, the board, and the public, as to their reasons
On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 4:09 PM John Curran wrote:
> On 13 Oct 2021, at 1:25 PM, Jason Baugher
> wrote:
>
>
> John, I won’t attempt to speak for Owen, but rather would address the
> suggestion of Board involvement in the process.
>
> As an outsider to the process, I understand that the Board cho
On 13 Oct 2021, at 1:25 PM, Jason Baugher
mailto:jasonbaug...@adamstel.com>> wrote:
John, I won’t attempt to speak for Owen, but rather would address the
suggestion of Board involvement in the process.
As an outsider to the process, I understand that the Board chooses from it’s
own ranks 2 mem
Behalf Of John Curran
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2021 7:32 AM
To: Owen DeLong
Cc: arin-ppml
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway
CAUTION: This email is from OUTSIDE our organization.
Please do not open/download any attachment or click any link unless you know
it's safe.
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 3:25 PM Owen DeLong via ARIN-PPML <
arin-ppml@arin.net> wrote:
[ clip ]
Dan Alexander served on the ARIN board from 2018 through 2020.
> Ron Da Silva served on the ICANN board.
>
> Both have board experience. Both have extensive industry experience.
>
Ron da Silva serve
> On Oct 12, 2021, at 08:56 , William Herrin wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 5:57 AM John Curran wrote:
>> (for reference the 2021 Board Guidance letter can be found here -
>> https://www.arin.net/vault/participate/elections/nomcom_guidance2021.pdf)
>
> Hi John,
>
> I interpret the lette
On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 5:57 AM John Curran wrote:
> (for reference the 2021 Board Guidance letter can be found here -
> https://www.arin.net/vault/participate/elections/nomcom_guidance2021.pdf)
Hi John,
I interpret the letter to require that any candidate who has not
previously served on a go
get 124
>>>> member orgs to sign to be forced onto the ballot, which is a hurdle that
>>>> those already accepted by the nominating committee do not have pass.
>>>>
>>>> 4: The end-result would appear to be a limited selection on the ballot
>>
om/>
From: ARIN-PPML mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net>>
On Behalf Of Mike Burns
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 4:45 PM
To: Scott Leibrand mailto:scottleibr...@gmail.com>>
Cc: arin-ppml mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underw
le hand-picked by the existing Board, thereby ensuring the overall
>>> direction of the Board stays the same.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Someone else already suggested a reform to the system above, where the
>>> nom-com would have to provide their reasons
the
> nom-com would have to provide their reasons for rejection, which I fully
> support. I’d also suggest that if there is going to be a 2% petition
> requirement to be on the ballot, it should be for all candidates, not just
> for those who the nom-com rejects. Level the playing fi
the ballot
>>> of people hand-picked by the existing Board, thereby ensuring the overall
>>> direction of the Board stays the same.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Someone else already suggested a reform to the system above, where the
>>> nom-com wou
Someone else already suggested a reform to the system above, where the
>> nom-com would have to provide their reasons for rejection, which I fully
>> support. I’d also suggest that if there is going to be a 2% petition
>> requirement to be on the ballot, it should be for all candidat
; 770.656.1460
>
> 100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338
>
>
>
> <https://www.facebook.com/EclipseNetworks/>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/eclipse-networks-inc/>
> <https://twitter.com/NetworksEclipse>
> <https:
Hello PPML,
I would like to thank everyone for their support, and the awareness you have
brought to the process. While I’m trying to remain an observer, it is worth
mentioning that the deadline for the petition is next Monday, 10/18 at noon
eastern. All your help has been much appreciated.
Sin
Of Jason Baugher
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2021 1:35 PM
To: Scott Leibrand ; arin-ppml
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway
I signed the petitions to get these 2 candidates on the ballot, because unless
someone on the nom-com cares to give us a valid reason to reject them
..@arin.net>>
On Behalf Of Mike Burns
Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 4:45 PM
To: Scott Leibrand mailto:scottleibr...@gmail.com>>
Cc: arin-ppml mailto:arin-ppml@arin.net>>
Subject: Re: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway
I was rejected for an Advisory Council candida
> On Oct 9, 2021, at 5:58 PM, Scott Leibrand wrote:
> Has ARIN disclosed anything about why the NomCom chose to exclude two
> obviously-qualified candidates from the ballot when they didn’t yet have 2
> candidates per open seat, and the 3 candidates they did include are all less
> well-known
On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 12:53 AM Owen DeLong wrote:
> To the beset of my knowledge, membership has never been a criterion for
> eligibility to run. It is a requirement to be able to nominate and to vote.
>
> I don’t think this is a change.
>
It is not. After further research and reflection it's
clipseNetworks/>
>>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/eclipse-networks-inc/>
>>> <https://twitter.com/NetworksEclipse>
>>> <https://www.instagram.com/eclipsenetworks/>
>>>
>>> <https://www.eclipse-networks.com/>
>
0338
>>
>> <https://www.facebook.com/EclipseNetworks/>
>> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/eclipse-networks-inc/>
>> <https://twitter.com/NetworksEclipse>
>> <https://www.instagram.com/eclipsenetworks/>
>>
>> <https://www.
| Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338
>
> <https://www.facebook.com/EclipseNetworks/>
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/eclipse-networks-inc/>
> <https://twitter.com/NetworksEclipse>
> <https://www.instagram.com/eclipsenetworks/>
>
> <https://www.ecli
: [arin-ppml] Board Election Petition underway
I was rejected for an Advisory Council candidacy even though I
was a candidate in the past and am a policy author in multiple
registries.
Another broker was likewise rejected.
There are 7 AC openings, only 10 candidates, but I was rejected.
I know
t; Steven Ryerse
>> President
>>
>> srye...@eclipse-networks.com | C: 770.656.1460
>> 100 Ashford Center North | Suite 110 | Atlanta, Georgia 30338
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: ARIN-PPML On Behalf Of Mike Burns
>
com/eclipsenetworks/>
>
> <https://www.eclipse-networks.com/>
>
>
> From: ARIN-PPML <mailto:arin-ppml-boun...@arin.net>> On Behalf Of Mike Burns
> Sent: Saturday, October 9, 2021 4:45 PM
> To: Scott Leibrand mailto:scottleibr...@gmail.com>>
> Cc:
I was rejected for an Advisory Council candidacy even though I was a candidate
in the past and am a policy author in multiple registries.
Another broker was likewise rejected.
There are 7 AC openings, only 10 candidates, but I was rejected.
I know another broker who was, like me, solicited to r
Has ARIN disclosed anything about why the NomCom chose to exclude two
obviously-qualified candidates from the ballot when they didn’t yet have 2
candidates per open seat, and the 3 candidates they did include are all less
well-known to the community than both the ones they excluded?
I can hypot
> On Oct 9, 2021, at 4:03 PM, Martin Hannigan wrote:
> There's a petition for two people to be added to the Trustee ballot after
> being rejected by the nom com.
Yes! Go vote on the petitions, so you’ll have more than three choices to fill
the two open board seats, when the election comes.
FYI
There's a petition for two people to be added to the Trustee ballot after
being rejected by the nom com. Petitions have been discussed on PPML in the
past. There also isn't a discussion list any longer. Many voting members
are here. We know Trustee composition impacts policy (recall when the
T
38 matches
Mail list logo
