Hi, On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 01:30:53PM +0000, Kurtis Lindqvist wrote:
While this might not seem like a major difference, I think part of the problem is exactly this. Perhaps the members SHOULD vote on the activity plan? At least the members might read it then?..
TBH, I thought we did actually vote (or at least "formally confirm") the activity plan, but the meeting minutes disagree with me. So, no, we did not. But I agree that we should. This said, this might actually be an even worse rat-hole than the charging scheme - how many resolutions do you want on it? In what detail level? Like, "shall registration services continue to do due process, even if it's costing 2 MEU per year?" (I could see lots of LIRs of a certain category vote "no" on this one). This would, obviously, be a bad idea. Even questions like "shall we keep RIPE atlas?" or "shall we move the RIPE database into the cloud, they tell us it will save 1MEU/Year?" are loaded... I *like* the idea of formally confirming "yes, dear EB, the majority of membership is fine with the proposed activity plan" (that is, the majority of those that can be bothered). But what if the answer is "no"? Questions elicit answers, answers need to bring consequences... Tough. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard, Ingo Lalla, Karin Schuler, Sebastian Cler Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279