Re: [wg-review] View from here

["Chris McElroy" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Excellent, Bret. personally another $2 or $3 per registration for this
purpose is not a hardship and that alone is more funding than is currently
required by all parties. That coupled with the TM Constituency becoming part
of the Business Constituency and adding an IDNH Constituency would go far
toward leveling the playing field and the budget being provided in this way
would disallow the argument they make of who would be funding it. Since we
are ALREADY the ones funding it through proxy anyway, this would just
clarify to them where the money has always been coming from in the first
place.

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic


----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret A. Fausett" <baf@fausett.com>
To: <wg-review@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2001 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [wg-review] View from here


> > Is there some way you can agree to "pay to play" at least to fund
> > the infrastructure necessary to maintain the web and list serves,
> > and a reasonable amount of scribes for documenting all of this?
>
> How about this? Domain name registries in open gTLDs accept registration
> fees from domain name registrants or registrars. ICANN takes some small
> percentage of these fees to fund its operations. Registries, registrars,
and
> domain name registrants reach consensus on the amount of the money that
> ICANN can collect and the amount of money that the registries can pass on
to
> their customers (registrars or registrants).
>
>         -- Bret
>
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

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