On Sun, Jun 20, 1999 at 11:54:34PM -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
> Blah, blah, blah . . .
Indeed.
> The point is that ICANN is setting up an
> arbitrary tax, while it is excluding those
> paying the tax from any say within ICANN.
>
> Can you say "Taxation without Representation?"
Let me see. I have to pay $35 to NSI to register a domain, and I
have no representation on the NSI board. Taxation without
representation, that's what it is, all right.
> Further, ICANN is undertaking a huge expansion in
> the costs of "technical administrative functions,"
> as is its supposed function. Remember, the IANA's
> budget was only around $500,000, a full order of
> magnitude (i.e. 10 *times*) less than ICANN's
> proposed budget.
Setting up representative structures is very expensive.
> Finally, where are the checks and balances?
> Who in their right mind would give the power
> to tax to the same organization who will be
> spending the money.
ICANN doesn't have a power to tax. It has the power to charge a
fee, just like NSI does.
> Bill, it sounds like you skipped your
> Constitutional law class ;-(
>
> Jay.
No, Jay, I think the point is that he has *had* a constitutional law
class, and therefore knows what he is talking about.
--
Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
[EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
