debate between the Chair and Co-chairs about whether this proposal should proceed. I have decided to post the proposal based on the following. The key criteria from the APNIC SIG guidelines are: The Chair may decide that a proposal is not suitable for discussion at the forthcoming SIG session if: 1) The proposal is out of scope for the SIG 2) The proposal is insufficiently developed to be the basis for a useful discussion 3) The agenda has already been filled by topics of greater priority Item 1 +++++ The guidelines say: Dissolving a SIG It is not assumed that a SIG will continue to exist indefinitely. Each SIG should periodically review its charter to assess the SIG’s usefulness and relevance. Signs that a SIG may have outlived its purpose include: - Lack of discussion on the mailing lists for more than one year - Lack of response to calls for presentations at SIG sessions - Low attendance at SIG sessions A SIG may be dissolved if the members of the SIG decide that this is an appropriate course of action and this recommendation is approved by the AMM. Members of the SIG may make the decision to dissolve the SIG via the SIG mailing list or at SIG sessions. If a SIG is dissolved, all associated mailing lists will be closed for subscription, but the public archives will remain on the APNIC website. --- It's clear to me that this is a decision that only the SIG can take (with agreement from the AMM). This proposal effectively asks for that to happen. Note that the criteria are signs and not requirements and it's not the role of the Policy SIG chairs to decide what the membership of the SIG might think here. Item 2 +++++ There was debate among the chairs whether the met this criteria. I believe it asks us to look at the Policy SIG's processes and rationale for existence as the guidelines suggest. It seems to me that such a discussion may go two ways: a) the proposal gets rejected out of hand because everything is just fine the way it is b) the proposal provokes discussion and leads to an improvement in the way the Policy SIG operates Item 3 +++++ At this stage our agenda isn't so full that we need to reject this proposal.