Re: [44net] Running for ARDC director position

When considering corporate governance, tread carefully. There be dragons here. The items noted below are all nice but they do not prevent damage or even complete elimination of the organization. For example, even with the additions below, a group of folks interested in getting rid of AMPRnet could organize a bunch of folks to join, pay the dues to get voting rights, and then vote as a block to remove the existing directors, install their own directors, and then destroy the organization. This happened to one repeater organization I'm aware of and it was attempted at another. Measures like staggered terms for directors, separation of the operations group and user-group, and perhaps even having some verified skin in the game (such as a verified, functioning gateway, or some other measure) in order to vote are all tools used in many organizations. There are other tools. I don't want to start a corporate governance debate. But it would be wise to have one before making changes. Alas, this group already spends far too much time debating stuff and too little time operating networks. Now, back to working on a panel to mount POE surge suppressors for some new 5.8G links between our seven BBSs. Michael N6MEF -----Original Message----- From: 44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org(a)hamradio.ucsd.edu [mailto:44net-bounces+n6mef=mefox.org@hamradio.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Don Fanning Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2014 9:07 AM To: AMPRNet working group Subject: Re: [44net] Running for ARDC director position (Please trim inclusions from previous messages) _______________________________________________ On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 1:48 AM, ktolliver <ktolliver(a)hotmail.com> wrote: Ah yeah, now I see it... was hidden off the screen on my subnotebook. The way I read it, there are currently 3 directors out of a max of five which is bare minimum for a quorum. Elections are held in January. It could be argued as since all the seats aren't filled, Bart should be elected. But the process of voting isn't particularly clear except in management at the director level. I would probably suggest few things: 1.) The voting membership pool should be increased. A suggested model would be to use what has worked for the ARRL in that voting members pay dues. 2.) Brian should be paid back for his loans to ARDC right off the top as it would take the financial burden off him as well as remove any behoveness towards any director in lieu of financial contribution. 3.) There probably should be a fee structure put in place for some aspects of the network just to cover overhead such as AS/BGP additions or any large network change. Some changes that would benefit everyone could have the fee waived by the directorship vote. 4.) Basic IP allocation and DNS management should always be free to all radio amateurs. 5.) We should endeavour to keep our LEGACY status as long as possible between the RIR's as there are significant differences between the way ARIN does things and the way RIPE does things. It would also keep commercial interests in the IP space at bay a while longer as well as political/regional battles over IP space ownership in limbo (ie: the government of country xyz wants to control their chunk of 44net).