[members-discuss] is the self-assessment model really a good idea?
Thomas Jacob ripe-ncc-members-list at internet24.de
Tue Jul 10 15:53:24 CEST 2012
On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 14:12 +0100, Jamie Stallwood wrote: > Maybe we need to prevent LIR's from moving more than one band per > year, and then maybe permit changes only subject to a majority member > vote? Reasons for changing would have to be submitted and published in > the directory. LIR's who may be a bit "economical", shall we say, > would do damage to their reputation if their vote was rejected. > whatever we do, the NCC is going to have to act as final arbiter Quite frankly, that sounds like a bureaucratic mess to me, I can't see this as a simplification compared to the current fee system. > But first of course we have to agree that banding is acceptable before > we can discuss the mechanisms, and as you've seen, the familiar > arguments are back out. The 3(or 4? 5?)-band system broken by > allocation size alone, will hopefully win that argument. > Which is more less exactly what we already have today, isn't it?