nanog mailing list archives
Re: De-funding the ITU
From: Bill Woodcock <woody () pch net>
Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 09:14:28 -0800
On Jan 13, 2013, at 7:54 AM, bmanning () vacation karoshi com wrote:
Since it is possible to fund -by sector-, there is no good reason to tar the entire Union with the same brush.
Bill, please read the petition before attempting to comment on it. Again, the petition specifically excludes ITU-R, for exactly the reasons that you and I have both just cited. And if you think it's possible to fund by sector, you're not paying close enough attention, and haven't read the ITU budget documents I provided with the petition. - It's only possible for sector members to fund by sector. - This petition does not address sector members. - It's not possible for governments to fund by sector. - Money is fungible. So, here, have some rope: how would you fund by sector? -Bill
Current thread:
- De-funding the ITU Bill Woodcock (Jan 12)
- Message not available
- Re: De-funding the ITU james jones (Jan 12)
- Message not available
- Re: De-funding the ITU bmanning (Jan 12)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: De-funding the ITU John Levine (Jan 12)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Fred Baker (fred) (Jan 12)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Bill Woodcock (Jan 12)
- Re: De-funding the ITU bmanning (Jan 13)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Bill Woodcock (Jan 13)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Barry Shein (Jan 13)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Owen DeLong (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU John Levine (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Nick Hilliard (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Wayne E Bouchard (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Eliot Lear (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Fred Baker (fred) (Jan 12)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Owen DeLong (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Bill Woodcock (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Nick Hilliard (Jan 14)
- Re: De-funding the ITU Owen DeLong (Jan 14)