I’m actively involved in getting the ICA reformed or reorganized with a more focused mission and membership

and after succeding asking them for money?

Domo Sapiens.

I agree there needs to be more transparency. Not on Phil’s part but the organization.

Not having Phil is not good. It is a full time job for an attorney and Phil is doing an excellent job.

Fellow domainers, do not drop the ball on this. There is ICA and there is all the people who want the domains that they claim are rightfully theirs even though you own them.

I have just seen the numbers for the first time myself and although its not my place to announce them, I will tell you that Mr. Corwin compensation does not seem out of line at all for a Washington Law Firm. Travel expenses are related to going to ICANN shows which I think if the ICA can pull itself together it will no longer have the budget for. I think the only other expense is an account to file the required tax return and organization returns for the non-profit.”

and

“What can be done to get them to join ?”

Ok let me put on the fireproof suit here.

For me, I’d say start with a little more accountability and transparency perhaps. I haven’t supported the ICA because I don’t see much transparency. I see a lot of the sort of thing I expect from lobbyist (I worked for one so I know the drill) . . . “You are in danger you need to protect your interests” . . . of course we do, but what’s that going to cost over time. Lobbying is a moving target as there’s always something new that comes up to fight but it’s not a new industry so expenses could/should have been projected at the inception of the ICA. . . .

How much is this continued operation going to cost ? How do you sustain it if there’s a downturn in the economy ? How much did the original founders plan on the operation costing ?

I see that Phil has done some fighting, but I’d really like some specific bullet points on what it costs and what has been done. How about an annual report or some sort or yearly review ? Like a report saying “we spent X and we did Y with that money.” The state lobbyist I worked for was responsible for a monthyl newsletter indicating the progresses made, etc.

If the model can’t sustain from the current business plan/model and the current membership levels than maybe that does need to be rethought entirely or it simply isn’t a product that can pay for itself or that people want.

This association is like any product. Create a product that the people will pay for. . . Even if you think it’s a good “product” you may still have to actually do some selling . . . The current sell isn’t all that good with a lack of transparency, so I’m not buying yet. I certainly can be swayed . . . and certainly can toss in $295 but had I done it at the beginning I wouldn’t be pleased being left in the dark as you have with your much larger donation.
Just my 2 cents.

That’s why I said “ regardless of the SIZE of their portfolio and the EXTENSIONS that they might have” . I didn’t say regardless of the TYPE of domains that they might have.

“”any existing or new organization that wants to be successful at representing the domain industry should protect all domainers regardless of the size of their portfolio or the extensions that they might have. “”

This is the case with the ICA and should be continuing with that group or whatever group maybe formed to protect domainers interest, large or small.

Of course such group will and can not protect clear typo trademark infringing domains.

As far as there being two sets of domainers, any existing or new organization that wants to be successful at representing the domain industry should protect all domainers regardless of the size of their portfolio or the extensions that they might have. IMO

Yes there are two sets of domainers..

How expensive are the hotels he stays at? Why does it have to be a 5 star Marriott. La Quinta anyone?