Brian,
I don't think "irrevocably assigned to the IETF" works well for money.
In all other cases, money going to support the IETF is called "credited to the IASA account".
In section 5, section 5.2 and 5.3 talk about money credited to the IASA account. I'd rather add a section before section 5.5 that simply says:
5.x IASA expenses
The IASA exists to support the IETF. Therefore, only expenses related to supporting the IETF can be debited to the IASA account.
That should make it clear enough that the transfer of money into the IASA account is intended to be irrevocable.
Makes sense?
Harald
--On fredag, desember 03, 2004 10:38:30 +0100 Brian E Carpenter <brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
avri@xxxxxxx wrote:
In thinking about this, I think about the fungibility of funds.
By having a common account, cash flow issues that might be an issue at various points of the year can be dealt with more easily. For example if funds are earmarked for meeting fees, but collections have not come in time for the year's first meeting, it is simpler to deal with when the funds come from a common account.
On the other hand, transparency requires the ability to inspect the accounts that are pertinent to the IETF, its budget vs it projected expenditure vs its actual expenditures. This can, I believe, be adequately handled by so-called 'divisional accounting'.
Exactly. I think the -01 draft has it right, except that I propose adding a sentence at the end of paragraph 5 in section 2.2:
All such funds and donations shall be irrevocably assigned to the IETF.
(Like my "irrevocable" for the intellectual property, this is intended for the bolt-blowing situation.)
Brian
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf