[ga] Re: Austerity Measures

["babybows.com" <webmaster@babybows.com>]

Bill,

The Names Council adopted the Report of its Budget Committee
http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-budget/Arc00/msg00318.html relevant
citation below:

>From the date that invoices are mailed/e-mailed to representatives of
Constituencies, if payment is not received by the DNSO or its agent by:

** 30 days, the Constituency is sent a reminder letter and another invoice

** 60 days, the Constituency is sent a delinquency notice and the
delinquency notice is posted on the DNSO Website

** 90 days, the Constituency is sent a "show cause notice" (in which they
are asked to show cause as to why their voting rights in the Names Council
should not be suspended) and they are charged a 5% late payment fee to cover
the cost to the DNSO of the cost of money.  The 5% penalty is added to that
Constituency's dues for the next (not the current) DNSO budget year.

** 120 days, the Constituency is sent a "final notice to pay" and charged an
additional 5% late payment fee, which is also due as a added payment for
their next year's DNSO dues

** 180 days, the voting rights, but not the right to participate, of that
Constituency's representatives to the Names Council are suspended until such
time as the DNSO or its agent receives all past due amounts including the
varies late payment fees.
-----------------------------------

As the DNSO is an internal committee of ICANN that the Board has chosen not
to fund, it becomes necessary for the DNSO to pay for its own costs from
funds put forth by the special interests that participate as voting members
on the NC.  Some constituencies do not appear to have the ability to meet
this funding obligation... I believe that the Non-Commercial must raise
$29,000 within the next half year or they will forfeit their right to vote
(one of their representatives can probably give you the exact amount).

This funding requirement not only threatens several existing constituencies,
but it also poses a barrier to entry for new constituencies.  If we ever
succeed in obtaining an Individual's Constituency, there is every likelihood
that this constituency might not be able to meet the funding obligation and
thereby join the ranks of other constituencies without the right to vote.

This ultimately means that domain name policy issues will be voted upon by a
group that is not reasonably representative of the whole of the Internet
community.

We should be asking, why is the work of this internal committee (the DNSO)
not funded by ICANN, while other committees are funded.  Why is ICANN
spending $450,000 on a committee to study how to kill off the at-Large, and
not one penny for a committee that is charged with determining community
consensus on domain name policy issues?  I guess it's more important that
Board-squatting Directors retain their seats, than that we should be doing
our work on behalf of the ICANN Board in an efficient and representative
manner.


--
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