[ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks

Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> I am just trying to understand you reasoning. So you agree that the
> projects of RIPE NCC are useful, but you don't really want to pay for
> them?

No, not quite. I agree that *some* of the non registry projects that RIPE
has undertaken are useful. I strongly object however to not being consulted
if *my* money shoul be spent on them.

The problem here is that there is some sort of belief that there is a
democracy operating at RIPE and that the membership fees are some sort of
tax that goes into a shared pot. This view, IMHO, is flawed. RIPE is a
self-agrandising monopoly that abuses its position to extract money from a
wide range of "members" that, ultimately, cannot be bothered with arguing
about a "few thousand euro" for the service they get - because for most
member representatives, this is not their own money but that of their
employers - and why should they fight the system ?

Where is the cost-based charging scheme that other monopolies or (using UK
Oftel speak, "significant market power") companies are forced to use ?

> Personally I am not sure this is so much of an issue over if the RIPE
> NCC should do certain projects, as I think this is an issue over
> increased transparency in financials, information to the membership
> and better reporting on project progress/costs to the membership.

You missed the bit about *asking* us what we think. That is the point I am
trying to make - everyone "in power" conveniently forgets the consultation /
approval part and pretends that a one way information channel is enough.

Peter