[ga] Money

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

If I were a foundation with good cause that fit into ICANN's purpose, I
would not
give a dime to ICANN because they show no signs of fulfilling their
mission.  On
the other hand I would fund the GA because they are trying to fulfill
their
mission.  I like Bruce James' Idea except for control.  If all of the
goals of
ICANN were trying to be fulfilled money would not be an issue.

What would happen if the threatened non-com party just said to hell with
it and
lost their voting rights and went home.  Probably not their loss but
definately
ICANN's. In history a bunch of dudes said they were a lost cause anyway
due to
capture.  Once again I wax sentimental and emotional, -  I like those
people and
their mission, except for some guy who kept ruining it, they moved
through
business and were very informative in Melbourne. Who was the guy, I will
not
describe him as due to my irritation it would be deragatory at best.

No-- Funding is not ICANN's problem , - the reason they cannot get it
is. Give me
one week with the non-coms and I will get them funding!

With best wishes to all the wonderful folks in the non-com.

Jeff Williams wrote:

> Chuck and all DNSO GA Participants,
>
>   I cannot find any fault in any of your comments or statements below
> as stated.  However I hope that you understand that some of the
> constituency groups are in effect paying the DNSO for accreditation
> so as to remain keeping their voting rights.  A better funding model



--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html