On 7/21/19 7:32 AM, William Herrin wrote: > Yeah... It just seems like holding an asset in trust for a population and > selling that asset without consulting that population (or at least > consulting the organizations the population commonly understands to > represent them) is very fishy business.
This is the major problem, lack of community involvement. It's a world wide resource, but it's use has been hamstrung by the people in charge for years. > Having read their explanation, I think the folks involved had good reasons > and the best intentions but this stinks like fraud to me. Worse, it looks > like ARIN was complicit in the fraud -- encouraging and then supporting the > folks involved as they established a fiefdom of their own rather than > integrating with the organizations that existed. The "appearance of > impropriety" is then magnified by ARIN deeming the matter a private > transaction between it and the alleged registrants to which the pubic is > not entitled to a detailed accounting. You know what they say about good intentions. https://imgflip.com/i/362r0m -- Bryan Fields 727-409-1194 - Voice http://bryanfields.net
