[address-policy-wg] 2016-03 New Version and Impact Analysis Published (Locking Down the Final /8 Policy)

> Just for the record: part of the WG Chair's job is to judge the "roughness"
> of consensus based on the amount of supporting and opposing voices - both
> the number, and the quality of arguments have to be weighted (and to some
> extent the person making a certain argument).
>

I'm certainly not among the fans of Lu but seeing such a statement from the
WG Chair is unbelieveble. Really ? Do you ever judge a statement based on
who is making it and not objectively ?

In my opinion there is no space for any such extent and yes your job should
be to represent an impartial and objective arbitration. Otherwise, I get
the impression you are many times too subjective and try to enforce your
personal opinions on others.

If you can not be impartial and objective it would be only honourable from
you to step down, join us in the debates and let someone else do the job.

But as I've noticed (and nobody cared) you're one of the hoarders of last
/8 so I really don't expect you to do that.

Ciprian
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </ripe/mail/archives/address-policy-wg/attachments/20161019/4184abd4/attachment.html>