On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 11:20:50PM +0100, Gert Doering wrote:
"Zero" is not "the same as an arbitrary small number".
Mooep! Zero *is* an arbitrary small number. At least in mathematics.
The address policy working group achieved consensus on this, and the board and AGM implemented the charging scheme accordingly, with a per-unit price on PI assignments and AS numbers. Then the charging scheme was changed to waive the price on AS numbers, without a mandate from the community. I am aware that the AGM can just do so (as the community has no formal mandate on charging and AGM decisions), but *now* coming up with "we don't want to change it *back* because it would be making policy" has a funny smell...
I don't smell anything funny, tbh. The community doesn't set charges and the board/membership doesn't make policy. AIUI, this is how it is *supposed* to work. I don't think Nigel meant to say that it can't be changed back to some other number either (this should, in my understanding, only require a CS proposal and a successful membership vote). What I understood is that it can't/shouldn't be changed because a policy somehow depends on it being a certain number. There have been unfortunate conflicts between community and membership before. In my opinion, policy should be made in a way so it can stand without infringing on the freedom of the board and membership to manage their financial matters. In that respect, yes, 2001-07 was flawed too. rgds, Sascha Luck