[PDB-gov] Promoting the election [was: organizational documents]

Wed Oct 21 07:33:06 PDT 2015

I completely agree the board elections have a big impact. Personally, I think the more, the merrier. I would love to see everyone voting.

However, I also think The PDB has done a pretty good job “promoting” this. An email was sent to _every_single_contact_ in the DB. And when we did that, we explained that if people wanted to be involved, here were the lists to join. In that email, we promised not to do it again. I would like to hold to that promise.

We also went to multiple conferences, talked to individuals, sent the survey around, etc., etc. This is not PDB trying to hide anything.

If anyone would like to post to NANOG, or announce at a conference, feel free. Again, nothing to hide. But my personal opinion is most people are tired of hearing about this. The community has been asked multiple times, and their voices are overwhelmingly clear. Well, OK, the vast majority of people are more in the “huh, did you say something?” category. But the ones who do give a shit have repeatedly and overwhelmingly said “get on with it” and “keep it independent”.

So we are trying to do just that with the least amount of annoyance to people who did not “opt in”.

In summary, you are welcome - encouraged! - to socialize this however you feel appropriate. Get your friends to join pdb-gov. Get them to vote. Get them involved. Post to whatever mailing list you like - as yourself, individually. But I am conflicted about the PDB organization itself sending more emails to more people after we said we would not.

-- 
TTFN,
patrick

> On Oct 21, 2015, at 10:14 AM, Daniel Golding <dgolding at google.com> wrote:
> 
> Marty,
> 
> I think BoD elections will have a little more impact that red vs blue bowl.
> 
> Dan
> 
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Hannigan, Martin <marty at akamai.com <mailto:marty at akamai.com>> wrote:
> Hi Team,
> 
> If PDB has to solicit feedback from every corner of the earth for mundane things like if they are going to have a red bowl for the soup vs. a blue one, they'll get nothing done. A lawyer is a reasonable minimum and they have one. 
> 
> Keep going.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Martin Hannigan / AS 20940
> 
> 
> 
> From: Daniel Golding <dgolding at google.com <mailto:dgolding at google.com>>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 9:58 AM
> To: Patrick Gilmore
> Cc: pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com <mailto:pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com>
> Subject: Re: [PDB-gov] organizational documents
>  
> Considering the relatively small number of folks on this list and the lack of activity (up until now), its important that this process is promoted a bit more widely - NANOG ,RIPE, etc mailing lists, and other forums. In order to have a real mandate, I suggest getting at least 500 folks on list...
> 
> Dan
> 
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Patrick Gilmore <patrick at peeringdb.com <mailto:patrick at peeringdb.com>> wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2015, at 5:30 AM, Hannigan, Martin <marty at akamai.com <mailto:marty at akamai.com>> wrote:
> > On Oct 21, 2015, at 02:52, Chris Caputo <secretary at peeringdb.com <mailto:secretary at peeringdb.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Chris,
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 20 Oct 2015, Chris Malayter wrote:
> >>> I would suggest you incorporate in a friendly state for not-for-profits.
> >>> Aka, Arizona or Delaware…not Washington.
> >>
> >> Is there something you know about Washington state which suggests it is
> >> not a friendly state for not-for-profits?
> >>
> >> The attorney (Steve Fisher, Foster Pepper) we have been working with so
> >> far, provided us with the following when we considered other states:
> >>
> >> - "A lot of for-profit companies (almost all publically traded
> >>   companies) file in Delaware because there is a massive body of
> >>   judicial decisions about shareholder rights, board of director and
> >>   officer liability, merger rights for shareholders, hostile take-overs,
> >>   minority shareholder protections, etc.  I just have never heard of
> >>   going to DE for non-profits.  We have hundreds of non-profits at the
> >>   law firm but I couldn't find one this morning in my search that was
> >>   Delaware.  Washington corporate law is basically identical to Delaware
> >>   corporate law, especially with respect to liability of its officers
> >>   and directors.  You are only going to be liable as an officer or
> >>   director if you commit tax fraud securities fraud, or some other
> >>   heinous act and the non-profit corporation won't shield you
> >>   personally.  That is the same in Delaware as it is in Washington."
> >
> >
> > Open-ix went to DE. Similar to WA, and friendly to electronic management eg board and member voting, etc.
> >
> > I'm ok with whatever the board decides.
> 
> I had the same question when we started this. However, after speaking with the lawyer, there really isn’t anything our org will gain from DE vs. WA. On the flip side, we get free legal counsel in WA, and at least two of the people (Chris & Patrick) were involved in a 501(c)(6) set up in WA, so we have some experience with this.
> 
> Seemed like a good choice. Plus it is not irreversible. Corporations are allowed to move.
> 
> --
> TTFN,
> patrick
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pdb-gov mailing list
> Pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com <mailto:Pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com>
> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.peeringdb.com_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_pdb-2Dgov&d=CwMFaQ&c=96ZbZZcaMF4w0F4jpN6LZg&r=XDN_BIPGnpb6V0w5M9FADw&m=ToyrvvDBvJV18wLPUDuvDJ6hZNphcDjQcv4DIzew8nM&s=pZ1929Bo6EebIpGtH5UHDfu4m4AjrKhS6UZEJS60EvM&e=>
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dan Golding |	 Network Infrastructure Engineering |	 dgolding at google.com <mailto:dgolding at google.com> |	  +1 202-370-5916 <tel:%2B1%20202-370-5916> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pdb-gov mailing list
> Pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com <mailto:Pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com>
> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov <http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dan Golding |	 Network Infrastructure Engineering |	 dgolding at google.com <mailto:dgolding at google.com> |	  +1 202-370-5916
>>  
> _______________________________________________
> Pdb-gov mailing list
> Pdb-gov at lists.peeringdb.com
> http://lists.peeringdb.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pdb-gov

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.peeringdb.com/pipermail/pdb-gov/attachments/20151021/b3e83718/attachment-0001.html>