[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals



Yeah I'd be happy to help with getting the paperwork going so everything can
be legal and I hope that one of the panel members does chair that working
group. I don't think the panel can afford not to guide that process.


Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Young" <bruce@barelyadequate.info>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 11:41 PM
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals


> Chris, you obviously have a good grasp of the requirements necessary to
get
> us legal NGO status.  Would you be willing to join a Working Group to make
> this happen?  It would also be advantageous if one of our panel members
with
> the requisite background chose to join you and chair it (hint! hint!).
>
> Jefsey, I know this interests you, but getting our DNS issues unscrambled
is
> equally important, and while I'm sure we'll eauisly find interested folks
to
> wourk our NGO status out, I imagine there are few active folks as
qualified
> as you to get the DNS job done!
>
> Bruce Young
> Portland, Oregon USA
> bruce@barelyadequate.info
> http://www.barelyadequate.info
> --------------------------------------------
> Support democratic control of the Internet!
> Go to http://www.icannatlarge.com and Join ICANN At Large!
>
>
> |  -----Original Message-----
> |  From: NameCritic [mailto:chris1@telnor.net]
> |  Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 1:02 PM
> |  To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> |  Cc: J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin
> |  Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals
> |
> |
> |  My comments are below each of your paragraphs here.
> |
> |
> |  ----- Original Message -----
> |  From: "J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>
> |  To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> |  Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 6:45 AM
> |  Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] Short-term goals
> |
> |
> |  > On 14:26 28/09/02, NameCritic said:
> |  > >Since the bylaws define our purpose and the structure under
> |  which we will
> |  > >operate, this should be the #1 priority for us or for the
> |  panel. Is there
> |  > >already a panel or committee working on it?
> |  >
> |  > Not necessarily a #1 priority. I think #1 priority is to live
> |  together and
> |  > see how it works, so not to commit yet to final structures. This is
the
> |  > first time ever that a significant number of people not knowing each
> |  other,
> |  > from every part of the earth, from every cultures, attempt to
> |  create some
> |  > organization together on a peer to peer basis, in a still
> |  top-own/bottom-up
> |  > outdated confrontation environment.
> |
> |  That's part of forming any type of organization. The people
> |  involved need to
> |  get along and all be working toward the same goals, that of the
> |  organization, setting aside personal agendas.
> |
> |  >
> |  > I feel the first thing to do is to avoid to speak of specific forms,
> |  > country, etc. for the global organization. What we can
> |  certainly do - and
> |  > this is what we did with the Panel - is to agree upon a common
> |  Secretariat
> |  > structure: we live in a real world.
> |
> |  And in the real world you must have a mission statement and
> |  bylaws in order
> |  to operate effectively. With a mission statement or statement of
purpose
> |  everyone, including potential donors know exactly what we are all
about.
> |  With bylaws the membership and potential donors know that we have a
> |  structured way of operating. Rules are always needed in any structure.
> |
> |  >
> |  > We have several attempted experiences to take advantage from.
> |  IDNO tried
> |  > and though about Tonga or other small non committing States. TLDA
tried
> |  and
> |  > went the US way, what turned to be very slow and a poor
> |  current situation.
> |  > USG tried another way with ICANN and California. Not a
> |  success. What I see
> |  > is that there are four stable experiences: (a) NGO and International
> |  > status, not our cup of tea right now (b) European associations
> |  (Belgium,
> |  > France, Luxembourg) for light non-profit (c) Switzerland, some
> |  > Central-America and off-shore Trusts for businesses and large
> |  non-profit
> |  > (d) canonic law of the Roman Church, not our cup of tea but a lof of
> |  > experience in supported diversity, globality and duration...a
> |  keyworkd I
> |  > always remembered, they have no "chair" (only the Pope): they have
> |  > "moderators", what someone translated very well at the DNSO
> |  WG-Review as
> |  > "stewart" - showing that Scotts are level with Romans in terms of
> |  > organizing networks.
> |
> |  >
> |  > IMHO this incorporation is not a big deal: I have incorporated
several
> |  > organizations in France I manage quite alone under the control
> |  of friendly
> |  > coopted BoDs (world@wide foundation, SIAT created in 1978
> |  which supported
> |  > most of the public international network documentations and
> |  international
> |  > users at a time). The real thing is a name, a banking account,
> |  a financial
> |  > control (ie at least three Treasurers and a public reporting) and a
BoD
> |  > motion system. Our organization is like a political party: we
> |  will never -
> |  > and we do not want - prevent anyone from doing what he wants. Any
> |  > organization with a "Chair" will fail. What we need is a
> |  catalysis, we may
> |  > accept Moderators/Stewarts. This is to be provided by the
> |  Panel. All the
> |  > Panel needs is a Secretariat.
> |
> |  IMHO, fundraising for a foreign corporation or association is
> |  more difficult
> |  than one in the US. I don't have a personal preference of where
> |  it would be
> |  filed, but the fact is most users are in the US. Most potential
> |  donors are
> |  in the US. They are set up to approve donations to charities and
> |  organizations that have the specific 501C-3 status and according to
their
> |  own set policies cannot donate funds to any other type of
> |  organization. Send
> |  a funding request to any US corporation and they will request your
501C-3
> |  information before they can donate any money. With a 501C-3 we may also
> |  qualify for grants that again specifically state that you must
> |  be a 501C-3.
> |  That's what ICANN did and for a good reason.
> |
> |  I'm not saying it cannot be done in a foriegn country, just
> |  saying we need
> |  to qualify for funding from anyone and 501C-3 is the most
> |  accepted standard.
> |  To have one, we have to have articles of incorporation and
> |  bylaws and a BoD.
> |  Different states have different rules as to how the BoD is structured
but
> |  all require the Articles and bylaws.
> |
> |  I am not familiar with foreign corporations, just looking at the
> |  future and
> |  see the future needs money. In order to get it we need to be
> |  structured in
> |  some way that is acceptable to the largest group of potential donors
and
> |  grant givers.
> |
> |
> |  Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> |
> |
> |  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> |  To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> |  For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> |
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>


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