[members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals

Isn't this really about the all-important question of whether The Membership exists for The Organization [to exist] or The Organization exists for The Membership [to provide value]?  I am rather concerned as going by your statement it sounds very much like it would be the former, that The Membership exists for The Organization to do the things it feels is the best [to exist].

Curious to see that now the pretense of doing it for the good of everyone, "membership decides" which tends to be mentioned around the AGM a lot, defending the RIR system, and all that has been put away. Poking enough reveals that The Organization doesn't really want to entertain the thought of some shrinkage, as some of its members more or less have suggested/implied/requested/pleaded, but instead wants to grow.

Considering that the activity plan for 2025 will be published some time in the fall of 2024, isn't this also a case of putting the cart before the horse? What necessary expenses are or will be is, of course, determined by... The Organization. Come time for The Membership to submit - but not approve as we are sometimes reminded of - comments on the activity plan, The Organization's answer will most likely be something along the lines of "budget has been approved in the AGM, activity plan follows budget, will proceed as planned." I'm pretty sure I've seen this movie before.

As for governance, one would have thought that the EB is ultimately accountable to The Membership, who voted for them, rather than The Organization as you stated. Perhaps my understanding of GRC is lacking, if so, apologies.

Happy to discuss.

Have a nice weekend 🙂



Kaj

________________________________
From: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> on behalf of Fergal Cunningham <fergalc at ripe.net>
Sent: Friday, April 12, 2024 14:06
To: members-discuss at ripe.net <members-discuss at ripe.net>
Subject: Re: [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals


Dear Sebastien,


The charging scheme is adopted by the General Meeting upon proposal of the Executive Board. The Executive Board proposes a charging scheme and is responsible for the adoption of the budget and the activity plan of the organisation, so it is their responsibility to propose a charging scheme to collect the budget for the execution of this activity plan.


For the execution of the activity plan of 2025 the board proposed multiple options for covering the estimated budget. Contrary to other years, this time the current charging scheme cannot cover the necessary expenses. It would be damaging for the organisation to propose a resolution that would result in maintaining the current charging scheme and thus a much smaller income. The board has no obligation to put forward a resolution that may result in maintaining the current charging scheme. It does have an obligation to put forward resolutions for the benefit of the organisation.


So in short, the proposal would be completely valid.


All the best,

Fergal

On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 12:09 PM Sebastien Brossier <sebastien at brossier.org<mailto:sebastien at brossier.org>> wrote:
On 12/04/2024 10:56, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 09:59:37AM +0200, Sebastien Brossier wrote:
>> Correct, but the question is: is it ok for the option to reject the proposed
>> resolution to be missing ?
>
> This option would take away the necessary resources for the NCC to do
> what they presented at the autumn AGM.  So, yes, this would be a very
> poor choice.
>
> The question is not "if" this is the budget, the question is "how can
> the costs for this budget be distributed?".  So "no!" can not be a valid
> choice for that question.

Hi,

I agree that a rejection is not desirable and would put the NCC in a
difficult situation. All voting options should result in the same budget.

I'm not asking if it is desirable, but if it is *legal* to remove the
choice to reject a proposal.
I think it is better to ask the question now, rather than take the risk
of seeing someone challenge the vote result later.


Regards,
Sebastien Brossier

_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net<mailto:members-discuss at ripe.net>
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/ripencc-management%40ripe.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20240412/723c0d87/attachment-0001.html>