Re: [registrars] ICANN budget.

[Rick Wesson <wessorh@xxxxxx>]

Larry,

If Kurt circulated the budget amung the top 15 that would also be enough
registrars to approve the budget as approval is done with market share,
not the one entity one vote.

sounds like a coupé.

-rick


On Wed, 26 May 2004, Larry Erlich wrote:

> Rick Wesson wrote:
> >
> > Bruce,
> >
> > >A large transaction fee penalises registrars with many names.
> > >
> > >Every registrar paying the same fee would be fair too and would meet
> > >your criteria no.1. It would however make it difficult for small registrars.
> > >
> > >The key is to find a reasonable balance between the two extremes.
> > >
> > >
> > At issue is the fact that ICANN as the "technical administrator" will
> > soon need to review all registrars financial to determine who falls on
> > which side of the balance point. ICANN currently has no facility for the
> > tax payers to challenge their determination, if you happen to disagree
> > with ICANN their assessment.
> >
> > Furthermore, learning today that the budget was circulated among the top
> > 10 registrars
>
> I thought Kurt said 15 but I also was upset that
> this happened. This sounds like a "what is it going to take
> to get you guys onboard" outreach.
>
> > certinaly does not create an aura of an "open and
> > transparent" budget process.
>
> It is surprising that he did not get response from
> all the 15 registrars. I wonder what the email that
> he sent looked like to be ignored by what appeared to
> be several registrars.
>
> Larry Erlich
>
>
> >
> > This whole budgets gets ICANN one step closer to becoming an
> > international Tax Assessor and Tax Collector.
> >
> > this isn't what the green paper advocated.
> >
> > -rick
>
> --
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Larry Erlich - DomainRegistry.com, Inc.
> 215-244-6700 - FAX:215-244-6605 - Reply: erlich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>