On Fri, Oct 13, 2006 at 01:08:42PM -0700, Dave Crocker <dhc2@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote a message of 34 lines which said: > Further most people who participate in non-profits do not fit the > legal definition of "member". In the world of non-profits, that > term has very specific meaning and carries very specific > obligations. Hence most non-profits avoid it by having > "subscribers" or the like who are not actually "members". [And, in another message, a reference to what appears to be USA tax law and which probably puzzled many IETFers:] > That puts things into the 501(c)(3, 6, whatever) category. And my > comments meant in that context. I have no doubt that your analysis is correct, as long as you limit yourself to one country. Giving the vast variety of countries in which IETF members-who-are-not-members work, and the variety of legal systems, I urge everyone to avoid basing any reasoning on a specific legal system. Unlike ICANN, which is incorporated in the USA for a purpose, IETF has no nationality. My knowledge of the US legal system is mostly limited to what you can learn by watching TV series so, please, do not use it as a reference that anyone should share. Or I will talk about the IETF by using examples from the french 1901 law about non-profit organisations :-) _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf