On Mar 25, 2014, at 12:53 PM, Bob Evans <bob@FiberInternetCenter.com> wrote:
Like every governing body, it's easy to criticize it. However, if it were some big monopoly with giant hidden agendas accomplished behind closed doors, I wouldn't see networks like Verizon disappointed at an ARIN meeting as their perspective was being over ruled by the majority. I have seen this at a meeting when Verizon decided to go purchase IPv4 space in the marketplace as they could not obtain what they tried to justify. It would have been a huge chunk of what remained. The IPv4 marketplace grew even more that week.
I like term limits for every governing body - except when it's a company I built with my money. :-)
I've seen term limits significantly harm organizations due to the churn that can happen as a result. Folks aren't as invested long-term as a consequence. This can clearly cut both ways resulting in some positions being protected longer than they should, or allowing the entire "vote the bums out" crowd to cause unstable behavior afterwards. I believe there are things that ARIN could do better but don't have the time to invest in the process to correct these. I do take time to lobby those who I know that are involved in the process and express my opinion of the ways that ARIN could do a better service for the community. - Jared