[members-discuss] Discuss Charging Scheme 2010

Martin,

Votes can be done as PGP signed e-mails. These e-mails can be published
on web site or sent to all interesting people via e-mail. So everyone
can check their votes are counted right. As anybody can check PGP signs,
it is not a problem voting through RIPE NCC web site.

P.S. Remember the board elections: people put ballots inside a hat, then
a few guys went out with the hat, did something (probably counted
ballots) and said the result. So the current voting system already not
better than voting through the LIR portal ;)

Martin List-Petersen wrote:
> Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>> At 01:41 PM 19-06-09 +0100, Rob Evans wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> voting through the lir portal, great idea.
>>>> (first on the agenda, the correction of 2007-01)..
>>> Could you clarify what you want electronic voting for?
>>>
>>> The policy development process?  Which doesn't have any voting at the
>>> moment, it is a consensus-based approach on open mailing lists -- please
>>> read the link that Andy Davidson sent around earlier for more
>>> information.
>>>
>>> Or the General Meeting where decisions are made relating to the RIPE
>>> NCC?  (Voting on the RIPE NCC executive board, accepting the charging
>>> scheme and budget, etc.)
>> Budgets, charging schemes, etc.  If a vote is called for at an AGM and
>> 50 out of 5000 people vote, there should be the ability to submit ones
>> vote via the LIR Portal as well.  It is called democracy.
> 
> Well. It goes even further.
> 
> At the AGM it was raised, if this should be done via a postal voting
> system, the LIRportal or an external open source system.
> 
> And to be honest, the LIRportal is in control of the NCC.
> 
> I made it very clear, that I'd prefer
> 
> a) if we spend money/ressources on something to let anybody benefit from
> that, ergo send it towards and existing open source system,
> 
> b) i'd like to be able to check myself, that the underlying voting
> system actually does, what it says on the tin.
> 
> c) maybe we don't want to give the NCC any chance (we know they don't do
> it, but why tempt them), with tampering with the way the system counts
> the votes.
> 
> The external open source system, maybe even handled by an external
> entity would cover all those 3 points.
> 
> Now, the vote on that hasn't been done yet, but there was some clear
> opinions on where we go, because I didn't stand alone in the room with
> that opinion.
> 
> As for budgets, charging schemes, etc., yes, that's up for
> vote/discussion at the AGM. Correct.
> 
> Kind regards,
> Martin List-Petersen


-- 
WBR,
Max Tulyev (MT6561-RIPE, 2:463/253 at FIDO)