Dear Cartsten,

You have not said anything clear here, please see my replies inline.

Also your replies are clearly from your ex-position I think at Deutsche Telekom. Big player people seem not to understand other niche companies. Your view is in line with that.

Also if in Germany 1400 Euro's are peanuts maybe for other companies it isn't. I'm not saying that I personally have a problem with this amount, but I see companies struggling and this move could have significant impact on them.

RIPE position on allowing everyone to still have access to IPV4 (read as allowing even small companies), is in contradiction with your view.

Maybe you didn't pay attention on my concerns. My position is not against moving to a yearly billing plan, but against quick changes to things that should be discussed and voted upon.

On 12/22/18 15:48, Carsten Schiefner wrote:

Adrian, all -

On 21.12.2018 23:24, Adrian Pitulac wrote:

Dear members and RIPE NCC,

Although I can understand part of the motivation for such a change in
billing schedule, notifying us with just ±45 days before sending the
actual 1 year fee invoice is *unacceptable*!

I do understand and support any measure to limit multiple LIRs, but
companies plan such expenses in advance.

*I do not support this tight schedule on going to an annual billing plan
for the LIRs who are old enough and behave correctly. Even if you come
in January and provide a transition plan, it should allow us at least
6-12 months before transitioning. Also I think that the invoicing on a
annual billing plan should be done in the second half of the year. This
way things would be fair, as we are charging our customers after we
provide the service and not before.  *

so you're suggesting a "billing plan project" lasting six to twelve
months for how much again per LIR?

Ah, right: 1,400 Euros.

Not very clear what you want to say here. A transitioning process is synonym to a transitioning period. If 6-12 months seem unfair please explain.

Is like your cable TV provider tells you tomorrow you have to pay for 1 year in advance, not monthly. Even if it's a 30 Euro's bill I think you won't be very happy on this move.

Such a decision should have been taken through a voting process not like
this through an email on 21th of December before Christmas. Is this the
gift Santa left us with you?

I also feel angry on RIPE NCC management, as it seems that no real
decisions (like this one) are being taken democratically through voting,
and just unessential issues are proposed for voting at GM.

Adrian - please get real!

A billing plan, comprising facts like when to send them out and how to
collect them, is at the sole discretion of the organisation billing its
customers. Even if these customers are also members of this organisation
and the organisation itself holds a strong market position in the goods
and services it renders.

We are not customers! We are members of a NON-PROFIT-ORGANISATION!

Membership has it's rights not just obligations. Think about this!


And even more so if it is about what the membership fee is: 1,400 Euros
annually. The impact of it may vary depending on the country and its
economy you do the main part of your business in - but still it is just
a four digit figure at the lower end of the corresponding range.

I certainly do not a need a voting by the members on it wrt. the
question how to actually collect it.

Ripe is collecting it , so no worries there. It isn't about members not paying it is about how fast are they doing it.

Also I don't understand how you can complain about late payments as the
base of LIR's is continually expanding and your expenses are kind of
linear. Another argument I can provide you is that you redistribute
excess contribution yearly, meaning this excess payments we make are
cash flow for you.

This is funny: you don't see that you are directly contradicting
yourself, do you?

Quoting you from the paragraph before: "I also feel angry on RIPE NCC
management, as it seems that no real decisions (like this one) are being
taken democratically through voting, and just unessential issues are
proposed for voting at GM."

The last two GMs were about such totally "unessential" things like:

	* Adoption of the RIPE NCC Financial Report 2017
	* Discharge of the Executive Board
	* RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2019
	* Draft RIPE NCC Activity Plan and Budget 2019
	* Redistribution of the RIPE NCC Surplus/Deficit

- most of them even to be voted upon - and rightfully so! - by the members.

I am sorry, Adrian - but you are barking up the entirely wrong tree.

Adoption of the RIPE NCC Financial Report 2017 is non-essential because you vote a REPORT!

RIPE NCC Charging Scheme 2019? Voting what? The amount of the contribution? This is a yearly subject on the GM .

Redistributution of the RIPE NCC Surplus Deficit? Right.. Non-Profit-Organisation with regularly excess contribution? It is a must!

Voting DRAFT documents? It seems like voting something that could change.

Are you kidding? These are not essential subjects for you? No IPV6 transitioning incentive program, no IPV4 deprecation program, no mentioning of moving to yearly billing vs quarterly, etc...

As you are keeping some extra money you don't need (as RIPE is a
non-profit organization) you should not complain so much on this late
payments issue.

What a perfect circular reasoning - I am truly impressed.

Is it something incorrectly here? Am I missing something?

Best,

	-C.

P.S.: Happy holidays, all!