[members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: Charging scheme 2025 proposal (logarithmic)

> On 23 Apr 2024, at 8:51, Lutz Donnerhacke <L.Donnerhacke at iks-service.de> wrote:
> 
> * Mihail Fedorov wrote:
>> With all the respect to RIPE Executive board, there is a problem. From the day first 2025 charging scheme draft was published - thread instantly got hundreds of responses clearly indicating just one thing - that proposed scheme is not ok. Majority (at least that’s what I see in members-discuss) of members raised their concerns and responded that they disagree with it.
>> [...]
>> Correct me if I’m wrong, but I assumed that RIPE is members ruled structure. That’s what all RIPE learning PDFs say. You can not simply ignore everyone.
> 
> I'm sorry to step in here, but if you ask this way ...
> 
> The overwhelming majority of members did not respond at all. This means that they see no pressing problem with the current proposal.

Hello.
You’re a little bit manipulating facts, hopefully not intentionally.

You can not assume majority agree with you just because they do not respond. It only indicates that very small % of LIRs do care about this mailing list.
From those who read/participate - most replied that they do not agree and just couple actually agreed.
 
> 
> We only see a - frankly - small group of members who are emphatically loud and repetitive. It seems to me that their motivation is to want to reduce the already low annual costs even further for their personal benefit.
> 
> In most countries, a fixed fee per member is typical for associations and cooperatives. That's why the controlling department of most companies has no problem with it. And this is precisely why all attempts in the past to switch to a resource-based fee have failed: You would have to explain the RIPE bill to the accounting department.

This is again not correct about both facts.

First of all - RIPE is serving many countries, not just European Union. This includes different countries with different association types and different average budget.
One of perfect examples is LIR from Lebanon who posted here previously. What you call “personal benefit” in reality is 4 average monthly salaries not paid in this countries.

Also with current model and introducing of sponsorship RIPE created providing ASN registration as business model. This LIRs who trusted this model and started their business will be essentially killed if members will vote for “A” - or otherwise they will need to pay significantly more than world biggest ISPs.

And the last point - how is this can be considered cheap if it will be 7 times (literally) more expensive than other RIRs model? ARIN price for small org is $250.

> 
> Resource-based fees were introduced to stimulate the return of AS numbers etc. that are no longer used. Again, the same reason: you have to explain this accounting item.
> 
> Lutz Donnerhacke