[members-discuss] A Whim about next year's fees

Hi Erik:

On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Erik Bais <erik at bais.name> wrote:

> Hi Lu & the people in the community,
>
> > A very simple solution would be, let the companies using more address to
> pay---that can really help reduce their willingness to hold address while
> they are not using it. In the real world, many goverment input very high
> property taxes are the same reason.
>
> As stated in the reply from Henrik as he put it soo nicely in his reply
> ...  The cake is gone.. there is no cake. IPv4 is gone.
> Anything that has anything to do with any kind of fee structure based on
> how many IPv4's you have / own / use / not use / can't get is planning for
> failure imho.
>
> The RIPE NCC is a not for profit membership. This means that we as the
> members have to pay in order to have the organization do what we like them
> to do.
> What they do, is based on the activity plan. And that is also what is
> agreed (voted on) by the members on the AGM meeting.
>
> What we as members need to learn is that a membership of any kind of
> organization, if it is your political party or your soccer club or your
> friendly neighborhood IP redistribution friends which we call RIPE NCC, is
> that it costs money to run such an organization. It is always much more
> what they do for their funds, than just their core activity.
> A political party has, for instance to pay for balloons during campaigns
> or security and the cake and champagne they consume.
> And a soccer club has to pay the lease for their building, the weekly
> maintenance of the field and the goal netting, to name a view. But also for
> the Emergency Medics to be present during games, or pay a preset price to
> the local Red Cross to do such task.
>
> We have endless discussions about IPv4, and how we should charge based on
> how large a certain LIR is (looking at how many IP's they hold.)
>
> We want a fair system for people that want to start and don't make it
> impossible for all to start in this business.
>
> So here is the option one can chew on for the discussion:
>
> There is a membership fee, based on (budget minus (the young / new members
> newer than  years times 1500 euro a year)) divided by the total number of
> members that are older than 2 years.
>
> You can play with the sliding scale for the cost for the initial year
> member, second year member in between 1500 and the longer than 2 years
> member fee, but that should be it.
> It is the fairest system that allows for people to grow their business, it
> has nothing to do with IPv4 / IPv6 ... or how much one has or doesn't have.
> It is based on the actual required budget/activities (which members vote on
> via the AGM meeting)
>

This idea has few problems, if I may point it out:

1. The start of being a member of Ripe NCC has nothing to do with start of
a business, Google or Huawei can become Ripe member tomorrow but they are
world top 500 companies.

2. some members are only have few people(I know some LIR are less than 5
people company), and some members are national telecom, in whatever
standard it is not fair for them to pay the same amount fees.

3. The idea which voting power concerns, it come as same as taxes in the
real world, bill gates might paid billions times tax than an average
person, but he still only count as one vote while in term of US elections.
So as in the Ripe, large members contribute more financially does not imply
they should have higher voting power in the organization.

>
> And RIPE NCC can't get charged on a fee per IP TAX or something similar.
> And we can close this discussion every year.
>
> Regards,
> Erik Bais
>
>
>
>


-- 
This transmission is intended solely for the addressee(s) shown above. It
may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise
protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination or use of this
transmission or its contents by persons other than the intended
addressee(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission
in error, please notify this office immediately and e-mail the original at
the sender's address above by replying to this message and including the
text of the transmission received.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20120214/9ff2b9d4/attachment.html>