Thanks Margaret for your reaction.
It is clear we have a quite different opinion.
I guess we need quite a few more people to speak up in order for
Harald to be able to try and see consensus.
Bert
-----Original Message-----
From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret(_at_)thingmagic(_dot_)com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 14:52
To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu;
brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com;
harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: Issue: #748: Section 5.4 - Quarterly deposits
inappropriate
Hi Bert,
At 11:13 PM +0100 12/21/04, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
May be I need to explain my (personal) thinking.
This is good, because your personal thinking does not match my
personal thinking and perhaps that is why we have been having trouble
coming to wording that seems right to both of us.
In my view, just as an example, if we have this budget:
Revenues: expenses $5M
- meeting fees $ 2M
- earmarked donations: $ 2M
- ISOC budget $ 1M
and at the end of the year it turnes out that we adhered to
th $5M spending
and that the meeting fees and earmarked donations are say $
5M, then I
would hope we can set aside $1 M for reserve funds for
possible future
shortfalls and/or disasters.
I'd hope that ISOC would still be willing to allocate $ 1M for IETF
(at least untill we have our defined reserve fund established).
With the same budget numbers, I would, personally, think
about it like this:
ISOC has agreed to cover a $5M budget. The IASA is only anticipating
$2M in meeting revenue. This means that ISOC needs to raise funds
(in one form or another) to cover $3M worth of expenses.
If meeting fees and/or designated donations do cover the full $5M,
the budget is covered. If these revenue sources do not cover the
full $5M, ISOC will need to cover the remaining expenses from
non-IASA-specific funds.
I think that you are making a mistake when you consider the
"earmarked donations" and the "ISOC budget" to be two separate
revenue streams. ISOC will have fund raising programs, and _all_ of
the donations that ISOC collects from those programs are ISOC
revenue. Some of that revenue may be earmarked to specific projects
(IASA is only one of many projects that people may choose to fund)
and/or collected via project-specific fund raising efforts, but all
of this revenue and all related expenses are included in the ISOC
budget.
I don't know whether or not IETF meeting fees will be included in the
ISOC budget. That will depend on whether we view meeting fees and
expenses as IASA budget items, or whether the meetings are run in
such a way that only the surplus from the meetings shows up on the
ISOC/IASA books.
In fact I would rather see a budget:
revenues: expenses
- meeting fees $ 2M allocate to reserve fund $.5M
- earmarked donations: $ 2M normal expenses $4.5M
- ISOC budget $ 1M
And then if meeting fees turn out to generate an extra 1M
without extra
cost, then put the extra 1M in the reserve fund so we get to
our defined
"reserve" faster.
You still seem to be thinking that there is a goal to create a
separate IASA reserve fund. I don't think that makes sense. The
overall ISOC organization will be more flexible, and more resilient
with a single, larger reserve that can cover the full operation
(including IASA) than it will be if we hold separate "ISOC" and
"IASA" reserves.
If the meeting fees and designated donations exceed the IASA budget
on an ongoing basis, we will build-up some IASA-specific funds that
could be used as a first line reserve, but I don't think that should
be our goal, so I don't understand why we would want a budget that
tried to achieve that.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf