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]/
[members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Rob Evans
rhe at nosc.ja.net
Mon Jun 22 09:12:28 CEST 2009
> Problem is it will probably brought for a vote at the next AGM where > it will be defeated since the 50 LIRs who attend probably won't want > their vote diluted by the unwashed masses. I think you may misunderstand. There is some enthusiasm for changing the voting process, at least for the executive board (which is what the paper at the last meeting concentrated on), and especially among those who attend the General Meetings because if there are several candidates with some support standing for two open board seats, the election process can take a couple of hours of sitting in a room for round after round of voting. If you think the GMs are 'smoky room' affairs with everyone of one mind to get their drinking buddies in, let me assure you it isn't that way. That isn't to say, of course, that 50 people should be representing 5,000. See my presentation at last July's APM meeting, Hank. :) Rob
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]