I believe a better approach would be for those interested in the specific policy revision to propose the establishment of a SIG explicitly for that purpose. If the community agrees, then a SIG can be spun up, do its work, then be disbanded. I believe this would allow for much more focused work at the same time as reducing both spurious address allocation policies (since it would presumably be more effort to establish a SIG and get that SIG to create a spurious policy) as well as the risk of establishing a Permanent Fine Lunch and Dinner Globetrotting Address Policy Wonk Roadshow (Hmm. There might be a t-shirt in there :-)).
>For whatever it's worth: I deeply appreciate the tone of this proposal. And I agree with the general sentiment that RIR policy wonks are a bigger threat than benefit to the community. But given the ongoing RIR transitions (from RIR-driven to market-driven allocation of IPv4, from IPv4 to IPv6, etc), I'm not sure it's the right time to shut down.
My interpretation of Randy's proposal is to stop having a small group of folks pulling (or threatening to pull) the rug out from under the people who are trying to get work done/figure out how to cope with the various transitions. At some point, you have to wonder if additional tweaks are actually helping...