[members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Sebastien Brossier
sebastien at brossier.org
Fri Apr 12 09:59:37 CEST 2024
Correct, but the question is: is it ok for the option to reject the proposed resolution to be missing ? If it is ok, it means that the membership can be forced to adopt any resolution, just by having various similar options. This is a loophole that could be exploited for nefarious purposes. If not, the vote as proposed is invalid. To be clear: my intention is not to promote a rejection of the charging scheme. This is a more general concern. I find very suspicious to see a resolution proposal that can't be rejected, in the general meeting of a membership-based association. Sebastien Brossier On 11/04/2024 12:39, Fergal Cunningham wrote: > Dear Sebastien, > > According to Article 18.3 of the Articles of Association, if a proposed > resolution contains various options, the method of instant run-off > voting is used, as described in the same article (similar to the > elections of EB members). > > https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-818/#article-18-general-meeting-voting <https://www.ripe.net/publications/docs/ripe-818/#article-18-general-meeting-voting> > > Best regards, > Fergal > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:52 AM Sebastien Brossier > <sebastien at brossier.org <mailto:sebastien at brossier.org>> wrote: > > On 10/04/2024 14:54, Fergal Cunningham wrote: > > The vote for this proposal would not allow all options to be > rejected. > > It would be run with the instant run-off vote format in the same > way as > > the Executive Board election is run. So members would be asked to > vote > > for the three options in order of preference and the scheme that > > achieves more than 50% of preferences either on the first round or > > second round would be deemed to have been chosen. > > > Hi, > > Is this even legal, wrt the articles of association ? > Holding a vote to adopt an item, without a reject option. > > > Best regards, > Sebastien Brossier
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Draft RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2025 Proposals
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]