[members-discuss] [ncc-announce] [GM] Executive Board Meeting to Discuss Charging Scheme Input from Members

Hi Kai,

I am not a lawyer, but I know that legal texts are to be read more
formally. Specific words have clear meanings and less room for
interpretation than in natural languages.

15.4 b reads "the adoption of the Charging Scheme with respect to the
> coming financial year upon proposal of the Executive Board",  15.4 e "other
> proposals and/or discussion points put forward by the Executive Board or (a
> group of) Members of the Association (pursuant to article 15.6) and
> announced in the convocation for the Meeting".
>
> There is no exclusivity in 15.4 b that _only_ the Executive Board may
> suggest a Charging Scheme, but there's an obligation to the Board to
> suggest one at least once a year. Nor does 15.4 e prevent contradicting
> proposals to what the Executive Board proposes, especially not on bullet
> point topics mentioned earlier. Thus, prohibiting voting on the proposal
> "Keep current billing scheme for the next year", which has passed 15.6
> requirements, has no legal grounds AFAICS. There's simply no wording to
> even suggest that. I don't expect the legally binding Dutch version to
> contain that either.
>

To me "upon proposal of the Executive Boards" or "op voorstel van het
Bestuur" is pretty clear. There is one defined body to propose the charging
scheme which is the EB. And the membership then is to vote on it.
It may be an interesting topic to explore what happens on a GM where the EB
does not put a resolution on the charging scheme onto the agenda.

Besides that, I see other formal issues (that's what lawyers and courts do
before looking at anything else) with the current proposal that is supposed
to keep the charging scheme unchanged:

   1. According to 15.6 the membership may suggest "other subjects". The
   topic of charging scheme was already on the agenda, so adding a discussion
   of the charging scheme is not really an "other subject".
   2. 15.6 also states: "Such an application, accompanied by the verbatim
   text of the resolutions proposed ..."
   This is properly modelled into the form to suggest new agenda items:
   "Proposed text for agenda item (including resolution text if applicable)"
   And we have a proposal with the title "Keep current billing scheme for
   the next year" and the text for the agenda item "Keep current billing
   scheme for the next year."
   So this proposal does not even mention a resolution to be voted on. What
   we have is an agenda item to discuss the described topic.

With the EB duly adding the topic to the agenda, people backing this
proposal get what they asked for.
To me this means, we can stop discussing this topic here -- looking forward
to the content presented by Maksym Tuliev at the GM.

André

-- 
André Grüneberg, Managing Director
andre.grueneberg at bcix.de
+49 30 2332195 42

BCIX Management GmbH
Albrechtstr. 110
12103 Berlin
Germany

Geschäftsführer/Managing Directors: Jens Lietzmann, André Grüneberg
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 143581 B
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/members-discuss/attachments/20240508/2be380e5/attachment-0001.html>