[members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Executive Board Meeting to Discuss Charging Scheme Input from Members
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Executive Board Meeting to Discuss Charging Scheme Input from Members
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Executive Board Meeting to Discuss Charging Scheme Input from Members
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Simon Lockhart
simon at slimey.org
Tue May 14 14:37:11 CEST 2024
On Tue May 14, 2024 at 07:27:57AM -0500, Daniel Pearson wrote: > It feels like presenting the membership with a vote that results in the same > outcome, is not providing the membership with a genuine choice and feels > very manipulative. I'm not an expert on Dutch law at all, but would this > charging scheme even stand up to the scrutiny of the legal system there? Can > it truly be considered a choice when each choice results in increased fee's > and a larger bloated budget for RIPE? Yes, because you persist in thinking that this is a vote on what the budget should be. It's not. It's a vote on how the budget should be funded. The budget is set from the activity plan. The activity plan is already set. Want a lower budget (and thus lower membership fees) in the next cycle? Sure. Just persuade the membership that RIPE should drop things from the activity plan. Simon
- Previous message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Executive Board Meeting to Discuss Charging Scheme Input from Members
- Next message (by thread): [members-discuss] [comms-circle] Re: [ncc-announce] [GM] Executive Board Meeting to Discuss Charging Scheme Input from Members
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]