[CCWG-ACCT] PTI Funding to cover ICANN crisis

[parminder]

On Wednesday 03 June 2015 11:31 AM, Jordan Carter wrote:
> hi all, hi Alan
>
> First question - is this a CCWG issue or a CWG one?
>
> Some other questions...
>
> What would happen to these funds where the PTI's performance meant
> that the IANA functions were given to another entity?

Are we seriously considering the possibility that ICANN gets distraught
with an entity fully controlled by itself and decides to allocate IANA
functions to another entity not controlled by itself... This is most
amusing? Do we not have better things to consider - perhaps something
like what happens when US courts force US law and public policy
conceptions on ICANN decisions and what mockery it makes of ICANN as a
global governance body, a situation so imminent in one way or the other
that is would be quite safe to place a bet on it, at least I am ready
to. I am serious: any takers?

I cannot believe that this present process claims representativity of a
global public process, and as asserting global public interest, when it
is clearly so selective about what issue it would spend its attention so
disproportionately on and which voices and arguments fall on completely
deaf ears.

parminder

>
> Would they become a windfall to the PTI? Or would they move by
> contract or some other instrument to the new IANA Functions Operator?
>
>
> intrigued,
>
> Jordan
>
>
>
>
> On 3 June 2015 at 17:19, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
> <mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>> wrote:
>
>     As discussed during today's meeting, I would like to formally
>     suggest that the CCWG propose that Upon the creation of PTI, ICANN
>     will provide the equivalent of three years funding to PTI (both
>     operational and R%D), and that PTI should hold these funds in
>     escrow to cover any future situation where ICANN is not in a
>     position to adequately find approved PTI budgets (the wording will
>     clearly need to be refined). Furthermore, the amount provided by
>     ICANN and held in escrow should be adjusted annually based on the
>     then-current budget levels.
>
>     There may need to be some adjustment of this to cover interest
>     earned on the escrow funds, but I suspect there are standard
>     business terms that cover this sort of thing.
>
>     Alan
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>     Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>     <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>
>     https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Jordan Carter
>
> Chief Executive
> *InternetNZ*
>
> 04 495 2118 (office) | +64 21 442 649 (mob)
> jordan at internetnz.net.nz <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>
> Skype: jordancarter
>
> /A better world through a better Internet /
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150603/0747dcc0/attachment.html>