<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style></style></head><body lang=DE link=blue vlink=purple style='word-wrap:break-word'><div class=WordSection1>+1<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Note: I repeat, I feel the need to share this endorsement that I am agree with this sharing because the board thinks that we do not agree if we don’t share anything.<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p><div>-- Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best Regards Murat TERZIOGLU PREBITS<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Bochumer Str. 20<o:p></o:p>44866 Bochum<o:p></o:p>Deutschland<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Telefon: 0234/58825994<o:p></o:p>Telefax: 0234/58825995<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p><a href="http://www.prebits.de/">www.prebits.de</a><o:p></o:p><a href="mailto:info@prebits.de">info@prebits.de</a><o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>USt-ID: DE315418902<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p></div><o:p> </o:p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'>Von: members-discuss <members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net> Im Auftrag von Kai Siering via members-discuss Gesendet: Donnerstag, 25. April 2024 02:07 An: members-discuss@ripe.net Betreff: Re: [members-discuss] GM topic<o:p></o:p></div></div><o:p> </o:p><div>Moin, am 25.04.24 um 00:13 schrieb Andreas Grabmüller | QuarIt GmbH:<o:p></o:p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>I very much support this proposal, even though I probably won't vote for it. But I think it's an important signal that there are parts of the membership who are against the way NCC Leadership conducts their work.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote> Ack. <o:p></o:p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>[…] what irks me is the way we are treated. Last year, they tried to get their usual budget increase in by giving us no option for a new charging scheme that didn't have a budget increase baked in, and in the end the proposals failed and instead we stayed with the old charging scheme. I think that was because it was the only option without budget increase, but I might be very wrong. I don't think there was ever a survey about it. So now instead they give us no option that doesn't increase the money they can play with.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote> Ack. <o:p></o:p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>We always hear "this is a membership organization" and "we are reading the list" but in the end what the membership wants doesn't matter. The activity plan and with it the budget is set by the Executive Board with "input" from membership, but the membership has no decision powers.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote> Ack. And in my opinion this must change. In 2024, that is. <o:p></o:p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>[…] The way I see it, the activities that are financed by our membership fees (and with them the budget) should be voted on by the membership.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote> Ack. <o:p></o:p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><pre>I'm very much of the opinion that RIPE as a registry and a lobby organization is very important for us and should have the funding it needs to fulfil these functions. I do object to the way the leadership seems to think all the members are here for is to provide their yearly budget increase like nice little zombies.<o:p></o:p></pre></blockquote> With emphasis of "seems to think": Ack. I'm upset by the neglectance the Board is demonstrating with regards to last Spring's discussion. Yes, there's a five year plan in place the Board wants to follow thru. (Did we, the membership, actually got to vote on that plan? I really don't remember.) Even if the membership green-lighted that plan, given the recent change in economics AND last Spring's discussion, it's rather defiant of the Board to simply state "we do not believe that this is the right year to change the existing model" and call it a day. Given that it's now being discussed what kind of proposals by the membership are allowed by the Articles of Association, I strongly suggest the Board should drop the topic "Charging scheme 2025" from upcoming GM's agenda, do their homework and move this topic – in revised form! – to the Autumn GM. Regards, -kai <o:p></o:p><pre>-- <o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Kai Siering<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Senior System Engineer<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>mail.de GmbH<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Münsterstraße 3<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>D-33330 Gütersloh<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Tel.: +49 (0) 5241 / 74 34 986<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Fax: +49 (0) 5241 / 74 34 987<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>E-Mail: <a href="mailto:k.siering@team.mail.de">k.siering@team.mail.de</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Web: <a href="https://mail.de/">https://mail.de/</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Geschäftsführender Gesellschafter:<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Fabian Bock<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>Sitz der Gesellschaft Nordhastedt<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Handelsregister Pinneberg HRB 8007 PI<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Steuernummer 18 293 20020<o:p></o:p></pre></div></body></html>