No, I'm not suggesting such thing. What I'm saying is that we need to carefully consider how APNIC involve in IG discussion as RIR, (I think involving in all discussion is not appropriate way as RIR) and we also need to consider how much resources we can use for IG in effective manner, and such consideration should be done by bottom-up process. But, current approach is totally different.
So, we provided our opinion in AMM in this time. What is a problem?
1. From the transcript, you can see Rajesh and Brajesh also state their comments 2. From the transcript of Wed session (pp89-90), you can see Dmitry Burkov's comment. 3. I got applause multiple times during my statement 4. I heard same concern from multiple people before and after the session. (Unfortunately, they have enough reason they cannot speak up in public, but some of them call the Wed session as "Bullshit" (sorry!!)
I never mentioned the size of my membership. I just said, I am a APNIC member.
So, I don't argue about the survey after AMM. Also, some of EC members suggest to raise this issue on this list in addition to the survey, that's why I did so.
it DOES matter, since APNIC doesn't have indefinite resources.
In which my comment are you combining? You are creating new comment which is totally different from our intension.
Of course not, since we just speak up our concern and ask EC members to resolve it. And EC members said they want to know more details. That is current situation, and why do we need to run for EC? (or you run for city council whenever find a pothole on the road? Maybe you do so, but I don't)
Thank you for your advise.
Agree. But current outcome is very unclear.
Agree.
Trusting somebody is different from blind faith. Rgs, Masato Yamanishi
|