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

On 10. 5. 24 19:01, Murat Terzioglu | PREBITS wrote:
> a LIR with more than 3% of the allocation organised by RIPE NCC pays
> same as a LIR who owns lower than %0,001 of the total resource of the
> RIPE NCC. 

I agree that this doesn't seem very fair, and that was also my question
back in the days when we decided to abandon the categories and go for
flat fee for everybody. So DT pays the same as my neighbour with a small
ISP in his garage.

The reasoning back then was something around "this is a club membership
fee and usually the club membership is the same for everyone and when
you are a member of a club - you can get the resources that you need."

I'm not sure that we can get the categories based fees back as in
whichever way we try to define them - there are more people voting at
the GM that would have to pay more than the ones that would have to pay
less - and the majority usually wins.

Now - why the small LIRs don't cast their vote and bring the categories
based membership back? That's maybe the question that you need to ask or
maybe act on it. What I've seen here is just people repeating and
whining about how unfair this is... ;)

Cheers, Jan