Steve, Members of the Business Constituency are aware that standard incorporation language (in California, Delaware, New York, ...) contains phrasing of the form "any lawful purpose". Members of the Business Constituency are also aware that the Corporation Board " at its March 2010 meeting in Nairobi, Kenya, passed resolutions recognizing the importance of an inclusive New gTLD Program, and requesting stakeholders to form a Working Group to develop sustainable support needy applicants for new gTLDs." Yet the language of the 4th Business Constituency "Stress Tests" [1] posits the Corporation's use of "registration fees to fund grants to developing nations or other worthy causes" and further declares this hypothetical use by the Corporation of its funds as an "expands[ion of] scope beyond its limited technical mission". In your revised language this restriction is expanded from the Corporation's recurring revenues to include its recurring revenues and its reserves. Without commenting on the rational contained in both the original and your revised language, I must ask, how can an accountability issue arise from something that (a) falls within "any lawful purpose" and (b) has been institutionalized by the Corporation as a consequence of the Board's 2010 resolution? Thanks in advance for your clarification. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon [1] http://bizconst.org/stresstests