[PDB-gov] Voting eligibility

[Chris Caputo]

I think IXes are part of the PeeringDB core constituency, and I think they 
are among the most likely to contribute money.

I think low-cost ($5?) annual fee-based individual memberships are an 
interesting solution to what started this thread, assuming you mean in 
addition to organizational members.  Folks could pay the fee for others, 
as a way of supporting their volunteering.

This could all be done as a single class of Member.  Ie., equal voting 
rights.

Chris

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015, Owen DeLong wrote:
> I would say that they may well have a vested interest in the usefulness 
> and management of peeringdb even though they are not directly peering 
> themselves. Yes.
> 
> Why do you find this hard to believe?
> 
> As to stock classes… The difference is that currently, unaffiliated 
> individuals have no path to suffrage.
> 
> While I agree we should not change the rules for this election, I do 
> think it is worth considering in the longer term.
> 
> Owen
> 
> > On Nov 18, 2015, at 14:48 , bill manning <azuremesa at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hum.. so an IIX w/o an ASN has a vested interest in peering?  How does that work?
> > 
> > wrt "interested parties"...
> > 
> > Does this sound much different that stock classes & voting your "A" shares differently than your "B" shares?
> > 
> > /Wm
> > 
> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 2:41 PM, Owen DeLong <owen at delong.com <mailto:owen at delong.com>> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Nov 18, 2015, at 14:36 , bill manning <azuremesa at gmail.com <mailto:azuremesa at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >> 
> >> thought experiment:
> >> an entity has one or more ASNs assigned, either through an RIR or from private ASN space.
> >> Each ASN represents a unique Peering Policy (thats what ASNs do).
> >> 
> >> Posit one vote per policy or vote per ASN.
> >> 
> >> In the event that an entity has multiple ASNs/policies, all represented by the same natural person, it would seem prudent to restrict the natural person to a single vote, regardless of the number of ASNs they represent.
> >> 
> >> Are you suggesting that instead of the natural/legal entity distinction, that a better way would be to have a single vote per registered entity regardless of the number of ASNs/policies registered in peeringDB?
> >> 
> >> Think that might work.
> >> 
> > 
> > I think it’s more about not disenfranchising entities that do not have an ASN such as some IXs.
> > 
> > I would also like to see us avoid disenfranchising participating and active individuals who are not
> > representative of an ORG.
> > 
> > Owen