But that's not true in this case. The proposed activity plan was announced *right not this list*, and in good time to add comments and eventually make people vote on the AGM against it.
...
While I can understand your anger - why don't you just go and *read* the RIPE document with all the numbers in it? This year there was a net *loss*, as the "new members" rate was far lower than planned - and much of the budget (like RIPE training courses) is planned to be paid from thoese fees.
Those documents are written in the best EU-bureaucrating-English that money can't sell. Most stuff I see go past as announcements has me asleep before the first paragraph. I have tried to (quickly) read the 2003 budget statement. Makes no sense as there is not enough information there for anyone to make a value judgement. The document says 'X' and not 'X because'. What I cannot understand - sorry, it makes no sense - is why the budget requires new members ? Why is the budget not growth/shrinkage neutral ? New members should pay for their own 'new' requirements through the set-up fee. Again, sorry to make accusations, but whoever created a non-growth neutral budget is NOT doing their job right.
That would be the RIPE board.
OK. I remember something about elections, but will any board members here please speak up ? In your opinion is the 2003 budget correct ? Any doubts ? If you have no doubts, then I strongly suggest that you are not doing the right thing...
Ummm. They are separate. RIPE is "the community". The RIPE NCC is the body that does the work for us, and is paid for doing that. They do what *we* put in their activity plan.
I don't remember asking to be RIPE. I am a paying for the functions of the RIPE-NCC. I don't want any other services, research, funded testing or anything. What I (and many others) want is a registration service that is policy neutral because it is 'fair'. Anything else is just profiteering. Peter