[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