This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[eb-candidates] Question for all candidates
- Previous message (by thread): [eb-candidates] Question for all candidates
- Next message (by thread): [eb-candidates] Question for all candidates
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Piotr Strzyzewski
piotr at internetsailor.net
Wed May 15 17:40:15 CEST 2024
On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 12:18:20PM -0500, Daniel Pearson wrote: Hi Daniel, Thank you for your efforts to make things clearer and for your patience while waiting for answers. > I'll attempt to clarify but I do understand these are broad questions, so it > might be better to re-word it a bit. > > - Do you feel that the charging scheme proposal issued by the board was the > appropriate measure to make, or should the board have taken more seriously > the call to reduce it's budget and operate from reserves while it found ways > to cut expenses? The Board has taken the call to reduce the RIPE NCC's budget more than seriously by instructing the NCC's management to cut costs. As a result, the savings in 2023 were in the order of EUR 2.7 million (compared to the 2023 budget). Running the organisation within budget is good governance, but operating from reserves in such a situation is not. At least not in my opinion. > - When referring to RIPE I do refer to the RIPE NCC As I said during today's Open House, the budget itself is derived from and is the result of several things. Starting from the Activity Plan, through the laws and regulations in the countries where we operate, taking into account the geopolitical situation, including but not limited to various types of sanctions, as well as macroeconomics, where inflation and rising costs play an important role. With this in mind, I believe that saying whether the budget should be reduced, increased or unchanged is like answering a question without a clearly defined problem. > - Referring in general terms to the proposal issued here - > https://www.ripe.net/participate/meetings/gm/member-proposals/1/ and the > current action / response of the board in not allowing a measure to be voted > down, Let me comment on this by quoting Pavel, one of the candidates, who wrote a few days ago on the Telegram channel: "We hired external legal attorney to review their decisions and communication. So far we did not receive any feedback that their action in any violation of law and articles of association". The board is bound by Dutch law and the AoA, and that's the line I won't cross. And I'm glad that the external lawyer has confirmed that this line has not been crossed. > but instead rigging or guaranteeing that regardless of the number or > style of votes, one of their proposed measures will pass. > > I feel this may have been calculated, since last year an option to maintain > the existing choice was included, which received the majority vote, however, > this year no such option was included so regardless of ones feelings, and > regardless how much a member may disagree with that choice there is no way > to record that displeasure and have it reflect in the vote. I hear you. At the same time, I could not agree more with what the NCC has said in the Q&A on the RIPE NCC Charging Scheme website: "A fee increase is needed to account for continued economic uncertainty, inflation and a reduction in the number of LIR accounts. An option without a fee increase would seriously compromise the RIPE NCC's ability to carry out its work and provide high-quality services." Best, Piotr > Daniel~ > > > On 5/14/24 11:33 AM, Piotr Strzyzewski wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 07:16:06AM -0500, Daniel Pearson wrote: > > > > Hi Daniel, > > > > First of all, thank you for the first question of this year's election. > > It is much appreciated. > > > > > It appears this mailing list does not get used very much but I would like a > > > direct comment from each proposed candidate up for election on the charging > > > scheme changes, and your view point on if RIPE should be reducing its budget > > > and how the current situation is being handled. > > In order to better answer your question(s), I would like to ask you for > > a clarification: > > - what exactly do you mean by "the charging scheme changes" > > - whether by RIPE you mean RIPE Community or RIPE NCC > > - which current situation you have in mind > > > > While waiting for your comments, I encourage everyone to come to > > tomorrow's Open House, where you can ask these and other questions. > > > > Best, > > Piotr > > -- Piotr Strzyżewski
- Previous message (by thread): [eb-candidates] Question for all candidates
- Next message (by thread): [eb-candidates] Question for all candidates
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]