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

Hi Daniel,

Here is the mail from Hans Petter last year announcing the Draft Activity
Plan.

https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/2023-October/001679.html

You can see he points to the cost savings made, and the fact we ran an Open
House to get more feedback, and published several articles on the document.
And we discussed this at the RIPE Meeting and General Meeting and asked for
feedback repeatedly on other channels.

The mail announcing the final version is here, and it shows the amendments
made based on member feedback and the main source of cost savings we
achieved:

https://www.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ncc-announce/2023-December/001692.html

We do see the Activity Plan and Budget receives much less feedback than the
Charging Scheme, which causes problems when we are asked to cut the budget
but have not received much feedback on where those cuts should come from.
We will make a bigger effort to get feedback on the plan this year and we
will be hoping to see a good discussion around it in the Autumn.

Best regards,

Fergal

On Tue, May 14, 2024 at 3:11 PM Daniel Pearson <daniel at privatesystems.net>
wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> I have seen the activity plan brought up before several times, but I've
> not seen anywhere that the membership has been asked to provide input on
> it at all, much less provide any vote for it.
>
> The membership clearly stated last year that they did not agree with the
> charging scheme change, and, from my perspective, during discussions
> stated that the budget was of serious concern and that RIPE should work
> to reduce the budget.
>
> It does not appear that concern was taken seriously, and if I recall
> somewhere in this mailing list I believe someone at RIPE stated that
> reducing services to reduce the budget was not on the table or something
> to that effect. The RIPE leadership and by extension the board simply
> does not appear in-tune with the voice of the members.
>
>   Daniel~
>
> On 5/14/24 7:37 AM, Simon Lockhart wrote:
> > On Tue May 14, 2024 at 07:27:57AM -0500, Daniel Pearson wrote:
> >> It feels like presenting the membership with a vote that results in the
> same
> >> outcome, is not providing the membership with a genuine choice and feels
> >> very manipulative. I'm not an expert on Dutch law at all, but would this
> >> charging scheme even stand up to the scrutiny of the legal system
> there? Can
> >> it truly be considered a choice when each choice results in increased
> fee's
> >> and a larger bloated budget for RIPE?
> > Yes, because you persist in thinking that this is a vote on what the
> budget
> > should be. It's not. It's a vote on how the budget should be funded.
> >
> > The budget is set from the activity plan. The activity plan is already
> set.
> >
> > Want a lower budget (and thus lower membership fees) in the next cycle?
> Sure.
> > Just persuade the membership that RIPE should drop things from the
> activity
> > plan.
> >
> > Simon
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> members-discuss mailing list
> 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/20240514/93345c28/attachment.html>