This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Kurt Erik Lindqvist
kurtis at kurtis.pp.se
Fri Aug 22 16:38:46 CEST 2003
>> Are you also saying that having to have the AGM vote is a problem? In >> that case how would you else want to do it? Voting anytime through out >> the year if enough people called for a vote? That would make it more >> or less impossible to make or follow a budget in any reasonable way. > > I do not believe that the use of the AGM is appropriate for the "big > switch" > being used to approve a proposed budget that included 100% of > projects. The > budget needs approval, but it appears to much "yes or no". There is no > consultation - formal, bot mailing list chatter - on what projects are > approved for inclusion into said budget approval. I don't to objections preceding the discussions of the budget decisions, on the contrary - that is the idea with this WG. However, the decision needs to be taken by the NCC membership alone, and not in a public forum. This is the AGM. Best regards, - kurtis -
- Previous message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks
- Next message (by thread): [ncc-services-wg] RIPE tasks
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]