On 10/1/10 11:19 PM, Randy Bush wrote:

>> my comment from 9/22 that at most there should be two membership
>> states, members and non still stands.
>
> if there is a membership fee, i can see a student discount.

Not everyone on the membership working group agreed with all the 
membership classifications.  I, for one, see no need for a student 
classification.  In fact, I still see no value in student membership for 
governance of NewNOG, which is all membership is for at this point.

Students already get a discount on the price of conferences, so I am 
told.  I can see value to the students to attend the conferences, as it 
is a learning experience for them, just like the rest of us.  I don't 
see any value to NANOG, though, as most students lack any experience in 
inter-networking, or common sense, for that matter.

The bylaws could use quite a bit of improvement, and should have had 
some proofreading done before being put to a vote, as the structure is 
less than consistent, but...  At this point, I do not see any more 
changes going into the bylaws before the election.  My suggestion would 
be to vote to ratify the bylaws and the transition, and then at the next 
annual election, we can amend the bylaws and fix what needs to be fixed.

My comments are in no way meant to lessen the efforts of the individuals 
involved.  They put in a lot of hard work for very little recognition 
and even less personal benefit.  There was very little time to pull this 
together, and most have a paying job that demands their time and 
attention.  It is more a miracle that we have anything to vote on at all.

  -Sean

_______________________________________________
Nanog-futures mailing list
Nanog-futures@nanog.org
https://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures

Reply via email to