Hi,
On 5 September 2012 10:53, Dean Pemberton
<dean@deanpemberton.com> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
...
POSSIBLE SOLUTION:
With simple changes made to the PDP, the membership could be
encouraged to bring discuss issues and possible solutions rather than
presenting a finished piece of work. As such, policy proposals will be
more representative of the views of the whole membership and consensus
should be much easier to achieve.
My suggested changes to the PDP are as follows:
. A Problem Statement is posted to the Policy-SIG list outlining a
problem or issue with the current APNIC policies. This need be no
more than the first paragraph of this email. It is purely a place to
start discussion.
. The proposer leads conversation on the Policy-SIG list to develop
possible solutions to this Problem Statement. ...
This scheme still requires the proposer to initially create the (final) Problem Statement.
I think that if someone is experiencing a problem, then there are likely to other people with similar problems,
and the usefulness of the process could be improved by solving the generic problem rather than one point problem.
So I think the flow could be
1) initial problem posted
2) problem discussion
3) Problem Statement posted
4) solution discussion
5) policy change proposal (if required)
Thanks,
John
