Re: [atlarge-discuss] membership fees

[espresso@e-scape.net]

Danny Younger wrote:
>I understand the difference between active and passive members, but surely 
>you must understand that ICANN has established criteria for what they will 
>recognize as At-Large structures, namely that they be "self-sustaining" >(and that implies membership fees) as well as self-organized.
>
>Ultimately, it is such fees that determine whether you are a viable 
>organization or merely a discussion list.  

Begging your pardon, I couldn't disagree more! 

Not all non-profit organizations depend on membership fees for their operating costs, and many exist thanks to volunteer workers and donation of the necessary resources.

As for "merely a discussion list", I am happily a member of quite a number of lists -- some related to my professional activities, others of an activist nature -- which have existed for years and provided a good venue for collaborative work by a committed team.

Since when is the sole criterion for legitimacy of political input a fee-paying membership? In what kind of open democracy do voters have to pay for the privilege of voting? I can understand ICANN, with its corporate orientation, seeing this as desirable but didn't expect to find that attitude here.

>Try not to duck the need to establish such fees (for one thing it will >allow you to be paid for your webmaster duties).  Every organization that >intends to succeed must raise revenues in some fashion.

In general, yes -- assuming that the people involved are trying to do something that costs money beyond what voluntary contributions can raise and  people will voluntarily contribute in terms of their labour. However, I see no reason why establishing membership fees -- which by their very nature will exclude people from participation -- is a prerequisite for success, given that other models are possible and that the goal here is supposed to be the formation of a democratic constituency organization.

>For all we know, this organization may one day wish to apply to become a 
>provisional constituency within a Supporting Organization -- that will 
>require real cash (probably around $16,000 per annum if there are at least 
>five such organizations within the SO since Secretariat and teleconference 
>charges will need to be supported).  

This is one of the prime proofs that ICANN is not intended to be open to all nationalities and geographical regions. $16,000 U.S. is not a small fee to
most of us, especially given that it's about $25,000 Canadian and even a $10/year membership would rule out about 25% of the population here. Just imagine what that $10 would mean to that half of the world's population who must survive on $2/day or less! Talk about built-in inequity!

>Perhaps the candidates would like to comment on membership fees... how high 
>should they be?  Should they be scaled?  How much cash will the >organization require?  Should a budget committee be established?  Should a >treasurer be elected or appointed?  Should the organization be incorporated >to facilitate charitable donations?  Where should it be incorporated?  What >will be the real transaction cost of currency conversion?

I'm not a candidate (and am now beginning to regret it, though I really don't have the time to spare) but I am a member and I would like to put a motion that any such membership fees, should they be implemented, be of $1 U.S. per year. That just might be affordable to the less-fortunate half of the world's population, some of whom already have Internet access through organizations in their own regions and others of whom have been promised access within three years by the international community. 

Naturally, no North American bank would process a cheque for less than the whole amount, so I'd suggest the fee be payable in cash or international reply coupons or by postal order to a trusted NGO in each country which could then remit a list of new members and a cheque for the total of their fees, perhaps less a small percentage for handling the matter.

As for the rest:
- it should probably be based in India, one of the most populous countries in the English-speaking world, and where Internet use is growing by leaps and bounds;
- it would be logical to incorporate it as a non-profit organization;
- the treasurer should undoubtedly be elected, along with the rest of the officers and directors, in a democratic process;
- the appointment of auditors should be ratified by the membership at each Annual General Meeting (conducted electronically, of course);
- its board of directors should be free to appoint a budget committee if it is too occupied with other business to do the job itself but it seems unnecessary to make such a committee obligatory;
- voluntary contributions by members and non-members who can afford it should certainly be encouraged, whether or not such contributions would qualify for a tax deduction under IRS rules.

Regards,

Judyth la pomme

#################################################
Judyth Mermelstein  <espresso@e-scape.net> 
Montreal, Québec "cogito ergo lego ergo cogito..."
#################################################



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de