On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 7:52 PM, David Farmer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:farmer@umn.edu" target="_blank">farmer@umn.edu</a>></span> wrote:<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
If you wanted more than the minimum it was always necessary to provide a story that passed a smell test.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, and that story was, typically, "I'm a new service provider and need an IP address for my service", or "I want to provide addresses for others by becoming a LIR". It may have been written in more words, but it's not like you had to show that you had contracts with others or whatnot.</div>
<div><br></div><div>You said you had a need, and that was sufficient.</div><div>�</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> �Also, if you wanted another batch of numbers you always had to explain what did with the old ones you were given, usually providing some data, much of the "bureaucracy" 2013-3 wants to eliminate.<br>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yep, you had to say "I've used them all up, I need more to expand my operations."</div><div>�</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Verified: 1. Make sure or demonstrate that (something) is true, accurate, or justified. 2. Swear to or support (a statement) by affidavit.<br>
<br>
Justified: 1. Having, done for, or marked by a good or legitimate reason. 2. Declared or made righteous in the sight of God.<br>
<br>
So, please tell me how "verified operational need" is that different. If you would prefer justified or validated operational need. �OK, what ever.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>You have already demonstrated that it is that different, by having to bang my head with cherry-picked dictionary definitions to explain how I and others should understand what "verified" might mean, and by suggesting different adjectives.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Others have already pointed out why innocuous-seeming changes like these can have an impact in how documents are read, also off-list.</div><div><br></div><div>If what you really want is to stick with the old phrase and old meaning, then I think it's better to say that you don't want to change the old phrase and meaning, instead of introducting a third option.</div>
<div><br></div><div>When we get too many different suggestions for minute, superficial changes to the proposal to discuss, we quickly lose track of what the proposed change is about. And that's bad.</div><div><br></div>
<div>But maybe that's just me.</div><div>--�</div></div>Jan