[members-discuss] GM topic

Hello Simon,

i agree with Mihail and i would add also something:

I think it is necessary to ensure active participation of members in discussions and voting. As there are barriers (language and timing) and I think it is difficult to say that 100% correct decisions could have been made with 5% participation.

And only for that not to add the category model as an option or other models is not a good solution i think. Offered models were actually one model with minor changes. There were no resource based models for example... 


--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best Regards

Murat TERZIOGLU
PREBITS

Bochumer Str. 20
44866 Bochum
Deutschland

Telefon: 0234/58825994
Telefax: 0234/58825995

www.prebits.de
info at prebits.de

USt-ID: DE315418902


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces at ripe.net> Im Auftrag von Mihail Fedorov
Gesendet: Freitag, 26. April 2024 10:40
An: Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh at ripe.net>
Cc: members-discuss at ripe.net
Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] GM topic

Hello Simon!

I appreciate your work and thanks for noticing this discussion.

You’re mentioning a significant and diverse group of members. As you can see in proposal just overnight it was signed by 450 LIRs from different places in the whole region, big and small. Does it count as diverse group? I honestly believe it’s majority of those who actually read this list.

Member proposal is formed as simple “do not change” because current logic clearly prohibits to propose anything else. I thinks it’s terrible on its own.

Proposed by board charging scheme was posted as a draft just recently and got hundreds of disagreements instantly. This clearly indicates it needs to be reworked. Yet it wasn’t done. Me, and many other members want to see clear answer why it wasn’t even tried.

Reasoning behind not doing anything is absurd:

1. If members didn’t voted for this last year - you should not remove such option this year. Maybe they changed their mind?  After all if members disagree with anything other proposed they still can vote for original scheme.

2. Members clearly indicated that RIPE budget decrease MUST be discussed. It’s always sounds scary, but this happens and there is no shame in discussing that.

Pardon my wording, but I still see no clear reason why different scheme wasn’t worked, only friendly responses without intent to do something. Sometimes not even friendly, just statements that it won’t be discussed.

If you state that board is not opposed to different charging scheme or budget cuts - please clearly indicate why it was not done.

Thanks!

> On 26 Apr 2024, at 10:59, Simon-Jan Haytink <simonjh at ripe.net> wrote:
> 
> Simon

_______________________________________________
members-discuss mailing list
members-discuss at ripe.net
https://mailman.ripe.net/
Unsubscribe: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/options/members-discuss/m.terzioglu%40prebits.de