Discuss mailing list

[David <davidvargas1 AT mac.com>]

Ohh England, their laws are more comprehensive and fair when it comes to
non-profit organization in this case foundations for non-profit.

On 12/27/2014 5:27 AM, Richard Lyons wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 09:43:30 -0700, Brian Koontz wrote:
> 
>> I'm not proposing an oversight organization.  Simply a legal presence that
>> would give OpenNIC a voice and an entity to manage OpenNIC funds.
> 
> I hope this does not come twice.  I sent it 9 hours ago and it seems to
> have sunk without trace so I am resending:
> 
> Not being an expert in any relevant field, I am usually a silent
> observer here, but I would like to commentbecause I feel this can turn
> out to be the key existential question for opennnic, and ultimately
> for openness in cyberspace.
> 
> On Fri, Dec 26, 2014 at 00:14:56 -0500, John Kozlowski (ShofarDomain.com) 
> wrote:
> 
> [...]
>>
>> Quality of leadership is a scary thought.
> [...]
> 
> 
> I, too, find "leadership" a scary thought.  With leadership comes power
> and, as we all know, power corrupts. -- Unless we can keep power
> dispersed, build a model in which the opennic community continues to be
> amorphous, but is the owner of the new incorporated entity, which itself
> could be a co-operative, and not-for-profit.  To the outside corporate
> world, open-nic-co-op (or foundation) would be an entity with a public 
> service remit, but the community would be able to exchange the officers 
> of the co-op/foundation freely and to maintian control. I think it is
> important that the new entity should be seen to have that public service
> ethos.
> 
>        _______                         __________
>    ___(       )_____                  /          \
>   (                 )  --control-->  /   Open     \
>  (    Opennic        )              /     Nic      \
>   (   Community    )  ---------->  <  Co-operative  >
>    (_           __)     people      \     or       /
>      (___     _)     <-----------    \ Foundation /
>          (___)                        \__________/
> 
> A key point is that the Foundation does not replace the existing
> community and remains under community control.
> 
> The idea of the famously-neutral Sweden being the registered home of the
> incorporated part of Opennic seemed at first glance to be good.  But
> then I remembered the case of Julian Assange and the evident fact that
> Sweden is very much under the orders of the US political establishment.
> Is there anyone on this list who can help in setting up the co-operative
> (or other incorporated entity) under a more obviously neutral regime?
> This might be on the fringes of Europe, maybe Switzerland or
> Lichtenstein, but perhaps better would be either a Latin American base,
> or a place with an image more easily associated with independence such
> as a pacific island.  Niué for example (it needs a boost)...
> 
> IMHO, it should be based outside of control by the USA, UK or EU.
> 
> Happy new year to all!
> 
> richard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>