[ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks

Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> You have been. You might not like how that process have been done, but
> you have most certainly had the opportunity to comment on it all on
> the mailinglists.

And opinions like mine are noted and then ignored. I am not alone in making
these comments, but I may be unique in that I am my own employer, the RIPE
membership fees are *mine* and I don't really care about being ridiculed for
talking about the lack of cloth in the emporers new clothes in public.

>> You missed the bit about *asking* us what we think.
>
> No, I said in another email I think that the WG should discuss the
> projects, and running ones based on performance. However, the WG can
> not have the decision right as that is with the AGM.

Why not ? The AGM should be a rubber stamp occasion where the "consensus"
arrived at either on mailing lists on through online voting is approved for
legal reasons. Come on, why not ? Your turn to answer a question instead of
answering with another question.

> Oh so I am also "in power"? And we haven't even had the first meeting!
> Wow ;-)

I was not referring to you individually, but making a general point about
what the RIPE membership is meant to think they have power for.

> I don't think anyone have forgotten this. Much of the input from the
> KPMG survey centers around this and from what I understand that was
> the sole reason for Axel to start the effort. I am sure Axel can
> comment on this...

I would have thought an opitional quarterly online survey would provide
better value than a once-in-a-decade KPMG one. But change might come.

Peter