From nigel at titley.com Tue Jul 15 11:56:47 2014 From: nigel at titley.com (Nigel Titley) Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 10:56:47 +0100 Subject: [members-discuss] Discussion summary on GM voting Message-ID: <53C4FADF.60200@titley.com> Dear colleagues, I would like to provide a summary of the discussion that took place here on voting at the General Meetings. The Executive Board will meet in September and discuss the issues that were raised on this mailing list. Please read the summary and if you have further comments to make, please do so on this mailing list or you can contact the Executive Board directly at. Kind Regards, Nigel Titley RIPE NCC Executive Board Chairman Summary of Discussion on GM Voting The initial mail to members-discuss requested that paper voting and proxy voting be removed as GM voting options. Nigel noted that other members had also requested that the time period for voting should be extended. Below is a breakdown of the discussion, outlining the points raised and the number of members in favour or against each proposal. Removing proxy votes For: 2 - This is easily replaced by electronic voting. Against: 1 - If I don?t have the time/knowledge to vote, a colleague can cast vote, allowing higher and more qualified participation. There was a request for the approximate number of votes cast by proxy. This has ranged from 11 to 19 since the introduction of electronic voting. Removing paper votes For: 6 - We are a technical community so this would be a natural move. - It is safer, faster, more eco-friendly and more convenient to vote electronically. - The GM Voting Report provides receipts and is verifiable. Against: 4 - There are issues relating to privacy and verifiable trust. - I understand how paper voting works but not electronic voting. - Paper voting is fun. - Voting receipts are a problem as they may facilitate "buying" of votes. There was a suggestion that people should automatically be registered for electronic voting and have to actively change that if they want to vote by paper ballot. Extending the time period for voting For: 6 - I need more time to cast my vote. - Suggestions of 24 hours up to four days. Most common suggestion was for 24 hours. There were three comments that the announcement of results should be made before the end of the RIPE Meeting. Nigel noted that making the announcement on Friday should be possible. Against: 0 Maintain practice of opening the voting window after discussion at the GM For: 6 - Discussions and presentations can change people?s minds. - Most people?s minds are made up anyway and the material is available online. - A vote without discussion is not very democratic. Against: 3 - The materials are available beforehand. - People have usually made up their mind beforehand anyway. Other Issues - Have a plaintext voting email instead of HTML only. - Remove voting by acclamation from Articles of Association. From sander at steffann.nl Thu Jul 31 13:38:34 2014 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 13:38:34 +0200 Subject: [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] [ncc-services-wg] Crimea papers In-Reply-To: <53DA22CE.20506@netassist.ua> References: <53D65628.6010001@ukraine.su> <53D66B6A.3060002@ripe.net> <53D68EF8.2060103@ukraine.su> <20140728180451.GC51793@Space.Net> <20140729073316.GJ51793@Space.Net> <53D75403.3080902@netassist.ua> <20140729092156.GM51793@Space.Net> <29BD1EF7-5F1A-47BE-9960-2F36DD21C01A@rfc1035.com> <7C28157D-633E-45BC-8855-4B3864CC436A@bondis.org> <53DA22CE.20506@netassist.ua> Message-ID: Hi, First, move this discussion to NCC Services and Members-discuss... > lets see this article > > http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2014.226.01.0002.01.ENG I think these are the most relevant parts. First the definitions: > ?brokering services? means: > (i) the negotiation or arrangement of transactions for the purchase, sale or supply of goods and technology or of financial and technical services, including from a third country to any other third country; or > (ii) the selling or buying of goods and technology or of financial and technical services, including where they are located in third countries for their transfer to another third country. > ?technical assistance? means any technical support related to repairs, development, manufacture, assembly, testing, maintenance, or any other technical service, and may take forms such as instruction, advice, training, transmission of working knowledge or skills or consulting services; technical assistance includes verbal forms of assistance.?. Then under article 2c: > 2. Annex III shall include key equipment and technology related to the creation, acquisition or development of infrastructure in the following sectors: > [...] > (b) telecommunications; > [...] and > 3. It shall be prohibited to: > (a) provide, directly or indirectly, technical assistance or brokering services related to the key equipment and technology listed in Annex III, or related to the provision, manufacture, maintenance and use of items listed in Annex III to any natural or legal person, entity or body in Crimea or Sevastopol or for use in Crimea or Sevastopol; and > (b) provide, directly or indirectly, financing or financial asssistance related to the key equipment and technology listed in Annex III to any natural or legal person, entity or body in Crimea or Sevastopol or for use in Crimea or Sevastopol. As a networking person 'related to the provision [...] and use of items listed' does seem to include allocating number resources. I think we need some legal advice on this issue again... Cheers, Sander From sander at steffann.nl Thu Jul 31 14:38:50 2014 From: sander at steffann.nl (Sander Steffann) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2014 14:38:50 +0200 Subject: [members-discuss] [address-policy-wg] [ncc-services-wg] Crimea papers In-Reply-To: References: <53D65628.6010001@ukraine.su> <53D66B6A.3060002@ripe.net> <53D68EF8.2060103@ukraine.su> <20140728180451.GC51793@Space.Net> <20140729073316.GJ51793@Space.Net> <53D75403.3080902@netassist.ua> <20140729092156.GM51793@Space.Net> <29BD1EF7-5F1A-47BE-9960-2F36DD21C01A@rfc1035.com> <7C28157D-633E-45BC-8855-4B3864CC436A@bondis.org> <53DA22CE.20506@netassist.ua> Message-ID: <2981AC77-7EB0-4C9F-8B16-F1644EBB9E5B@steffann.nl> Hi, I just got a question about how I meant this sentence: > As a networking person 'related to the provision [...] and use of items listed' does seem to include allocating number resources. Just so that people don't misunderstand me: what I meant here is that the terminology used in this legal document has some specific meaning in the networking world. The meaning in a legal sense is probably completely different from what I as a networking engineer would read. Which is why I think we need to let a legal specialist comment on this. IANAL and my opinion doesn't mean anything here :) Sorry for the confusion! Cheers, Sander