I might as well repeat publicly what I said to MM earlier privately.

This is an initial proposal. They'd like our support, so we would negotiate and see what's possible. It says that monies would be set aside "for each constituency and/or SG."   If we could get a fixed chunk of money per stakeholder group to handle administrative and outreach functions, that would be ok with me.  I do not have an ideological problem with it, and in terms of ICANN's budget we're talking peanuts, not so much more than they spend flying us to meetings.  If instead CSG insisted that it be at the constituency level, then no I'd not favor it.  So the point is, we can either have the conversation and see if we can shape it, or we can not even consider it. I'm willing to try the former and see before cutting the line.  

But of course it is not without risks, and injecting funding management issues into what today already seems like an increasingly fraught environment might be more than we can handle.

BD

On Nov 15, 2011, at 7:02 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> I oppose this idea. Adamantly. 
> 
> I don't see why domain name registrants should be taxed to support the lobbying of business interests. Cade and the CSG have plenty of means to find funds and to fly themselves and their supporters around. The idea of requiring ICANN to subsidize their "recruitment" activities is extremely distasteful to me. 
> 
> Yes, I know, we would get our pound of flesh, too. I would rather do without it. I think we have the resources to be self-sustaining and believe that the legitimacy of civil society and business representation will be undercut by creating a captured bureaucracy and funding spigot
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>> Of McTim
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 10:12 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] Fwd: Initial Draft Proposal regarding standard
>> Project Funding to Constituencies/SGs
>> 
>> On 11/15/11, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>> 
>>> There is a draft proposal from the CSG regarding providing standard project
>>> funding to the GNSO constituencies and stakeholder groups (see
>> attached).
>>> I'd be very curious to hear thoughts of the membership as whether we
>> should
>>> support this proposal
>> 
>> I would be happy to support this idea.
>> 
>> --
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
>> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel