[arin-ppml] fee structure
adudek16 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 1 14:56:45 EDT 2013
It is already in their dues iirc
On Monday, April 1, 2013, Christoph Blecker wrote:
> > wrote:
>> > >> No, it is not a "speed bump" but simply a choice available to
>> > >> having an equal voice includes taking on some equal responsibility.
>> > >
>> > > In that case, shouldn't we get $100 off of our membership for each
>> > > record subject to the $100 fee?
>> > The revised fee schedule did not change the ARIN membership fee,
>> > but as a result of this topic being discussed on ppml and as noted
>> > earlier, I will bring up this topic (of the most appropriate fee
>> > for membership) to the ARIN Board for their consideration.
>> Hi John,
>> When you do, I second Owen's notion that the end user membership fee
>> should not exceed the difference between that end user's annual fees and
>> the minimum annual fee for an ISP member.
>> I'm not wed to the idea that an ISP paying a total of $500/year should
>> automatically be an ARIN member. But if they are, an end-user paying a
>> total of $500/year should be too.
> Thoughts: If the $500/year membership fee to end users is to offset the
> costs of governing ARIN and ensuring that the electorate is interested in
> participating, why isn't this extra membership fee charged to ISPs? Why
> would ISPs be assumed to be more or less interested then end users? Are
> there any statistics available on how many ISPs actually exercise their
> vote? Is the difference in treatment simply because ISPs already pay so
> much, why charge them more?
> I support a review of the $500/year fee structure. I believe that whatever
> the direction taken (offset by fees, or what have you), that the voting
> playing field should be equal between all users of ARIN resources.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ARIN-PPML