Re: [members-discuss] budget 2012
See inline:
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss- bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Thilo Bangert
it's great to see people caring about issues at RIPE. IMHO it's not so great that some seem to derail the discussion on the membership fees.
RIPE is growing and therefore they need more money. do the math - and listen to what other people on this list say: while the budget is increasing the individual membership fee is not (as much), since there're many more members to shoulder the burden. Let's see what does it means for my company as small member in 2011: The budget should be increased by 100% * (19317-17891)/17891 ~ 8%. My membership fee should be increased (like 27% of other former small members according the charging scheme) from 1800 (+150 for my ASN+(ASN+PI)for a client) to 3000 (+150 for the same things). 100%*(3150-1950)/1950 ~61.5%. Can you prove your words about "the individual membership fee is not (as much) [increased]"?
also the increased budget is necessary to fund the actions decided upon by the community. Maybe it's better to vote which actions should stay next year than just fiddling about immortal RIPE activity "decided by the community"?
How many of those objecting the current budget have been involved in
these actions? Given that the only suggestions seem to be cutting meetings and trainings i get at strong impression that there has not been any involvement at all... Wrong assumption (at least according to me). I don't like to have the conversations become personal. But could you explain - why the priceless RIPE staff can live only in 5* hotels while they are out of RIPE NCC office (for meetings, trainings, business)? Or why for a group of 12
shaping people the training courses is planned in the 5* room facility? Nobody asked for full stop of meetings and trainings, just increasing the expenses seems chic at some time. And if you really read all messages here you should know, that there are many suggestions, not only optimizing trainings and meetings. I was at the GM where the fee for independent resources was introduced. Nobody answered plain questions asked by me about why the charging scheme should be changed (all had agreed that we could live with old one and have enough budget), why ASN selling is not "per resource" scheme (really the main argument of RIPE NCC against "flat fee" now) and so on. Empty meaning words as answers - the words we see here in the discussion again.
run-out-fairly requires extra work - but its most definitively the small LIRs that profit from it and that is a good thing. Several people asked for EXACT COUNTINGS. As soon as you suggested doing math - give us problem situation!
the increased service level with the much improved database tools etc. The same as above - what is exact expenses and what for the increasing expenses will go? What are going to be "new level of service" in numbers?
are much welcome investments well worth their money. By whom?
and no - this is no blank check for RIPE either. i still felt well represented as "the quiet majority" by the RIPE EB. You are going to feel trouble when at the next GM (maybe not the exactly next, but nearest) the quiet majority will be unable to outcount the active dissenting. I'm going to be at the incoming GM and will ask very uneasy questions.
Regards, Vladislav Potapov Ru.iiat ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
Hi, On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 06:24:22PM +0400, poty@iiat.ru wrote:
I was at the GM where the fee for independent resources was introduced. Nobody answered plain questions asked by me about why the charging scheme should be changed
Not true. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279 ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
Assuming I'm reading it correctly the draft charging scheme shows: 30% of XSmall members are moving to a higher cost category 59% of Small members are moving to a higher cost category 100% Medium members are moving to a higher cost category 100% Large members are moving to a higher cost category 100 XLarge members are moving to a higher cost category Only 9% of XSmall members and 14% Small are moving to a lower cost level. If there are more new members, then they are bringing both joining fees and membership fees to RIPE, why do we need to be raising so much more money? There is a global recession/problem/disaster (delete as needed) going on out there. Mike
From the On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 18:24 +0400, poty@iiat.ru wrote: See inline:
-----Original Message----- From: members-discuss-bounces@ripe.net [mailto:members-discuss- bounces@ripe.net] On Behalf Of Thilo Bangert
it's great to see people caring about issues at RIPE. IMHO it's not so great that some seem to derail the discussion on the membership fees.
RIPE is growing and therefore they need more money. do the math - and listen to what other people on this list say: while the budget is increasing the individual membership fee is not (as much), since there're many more members to shoulder the burden. Let's see what does it means for my company as small member in 2011: The budget should be increased by 100% * (19317-17891)/17891 ~ 8%. My membership fee should be increased (like 27% of other former small members according the charging scheme) from 1800 (+150 for my ASN+(ASN+PI)for a client) to 3000 (+150 for the same things). 100%*(3150-1950)/1950 ~61.5%. Can you prove your words about "the individual membership fee is not (as much) [increased]"?
also the increased budget is necessary to fund the actions decided upon by the community. Maybe it's better to vote which actions should stay next year than just fiddling about immortal RIPE activity "decided by the community"?
How many of those objecting the current budget have been involved in
these actions? Given that the only suggestions seem to be cutting meetings and trainings i get at strong impression that there has not been any involvement at all... Wrong assumption (at least according to me). I don't like to have the conversations become personal. But could you explain - why the priceless RIPE staff can live only in 5* hotels while they are out of RIPE NCC office (for meetings, trainings, business)? Or why for a group of 12
shaping people the training courses is planned in the 5* room facility? Nobody asked for full stop of meetings and trainings, just increasing the expenses seems chic at some time. And if you really read all messages here you should know, that there are many suggestions, not only optimizing trainings and meetings. I was at the GM where the fee for independent resources was introduced. Nobody answered plain questions asked by me about why the charging scheme should be changed (all had agreed that we could live with old one and have enough budget), why ASN selling is not "per resource" scheme (really the main argument of RIPE NCC against "flat fee" now) and so on. Empty meaning words as answers - the words we see here in the discussion again.
run-out-fairly requires extra work - but its most definitively the small LIRs that profit from it and that is a good thing. Several people asked for EXACT COUNTINGS. As soon as you suggested doing math - give us problem situation!
the increased service level with the much improved database tools etc. The same as above - what is exact expenses and what for the increasing expenses will go? What are going to be "new level of service" in numbers?
are much welcome investments well worth their money. By whom?
and no - this is no blank check for RIPE either. i still felt well represented as "the quiet majority" by the RIPE EB. You are going to feel trouble when at the next GM (maybe not the exactly next, but nearest) the quiet majority will be unable to outcount the active dissenting. I'm going to be at the incoming GM and will ask very uneasy questions.
Regards, Vladislav Potapov Ru.iiat
---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view
Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
-- Mike Hollowell Arrowhead Systems Ltd http://www.theinternet.org.uk tel: +44 1782 747044 fax: +44 1782 410734 Arrowhead Systems Limited: A company registered in England and Wales, company number 02694760 Reg'd Office: 5 The Villas, Stoke-On-Trent, Staffordshire. ST4 5AQ. UK ---- If you don't want to receive emails from the RIPE NCC members-discuss mailing list, please log in to your LIR Portal account and go to the general page: https://lirportal.ripe.net/general/view Click on "Edit my LIR details", under "Subscribed Mailing Lists". From here, you can add or remove addresses.
participants (3)
-
Gert Doering -
Mike Hollowell -
poty＠iiat.ru