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/members-discuss@ripe.net/
[members-discuss] amendment proposal for the Article of association
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] amendment proposal for the Article ofassociation
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] amendment proposal for the Article of association
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Thilo Bangert
bangert at parknet.dk
Wed Mar 28 11:10:17 CEST 2012
On Tuesday, March 27, 2012 08:07:09 PM sergey myasoedov wrote: > Dear members of the RIPE NCC, > > as you probably know, there are more than 8.000 members in the RIPE NCC > association. There are a lot of us. > > Members of the association can discuss things regarding the activity > of association on General Meetings two times yearly. According to the > Article of Association (AoA), the Agenda of GM has been performed by > executive board. > > There are some obligative things to be included in the Agenda > (elections, budget, charging scheme etc), and some things can be discussed > upon proposal of the EB. Another possiblity to put some things into Agenda > is the request of association members. > > Currently at least 2% of members should vote for adding items into > Agenda. Respective to the total number of members this means that _160_ > LIRs should ask the EB to discuss something that is not included in the > Agenda. > > From my opinion that is too much. No more than 250-300 members are > usually attending GM, even with the electronic voting. And 2% threshold > means ~50% of active members, so there is no possibility to raise any > question to the GM level. given your problem statement, i'd like to ask how often agenda items are dropped because they do not reach the limit of 2%? and how many of them do reach 0.3%? basically i'd like to know how big the problem is now, and how much smaller it would become, if your proposal would be implemented. thanks kind regards Thilo -- Thilo Bangert parknet.dk
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] amendment proposal for the Article ofassociation
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] amendment proposal for the Article of association
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]