My friends: This evening's proceeding was quixotic. We spent an hour tilting at windmills and chasing ghosts. I make these declarations without fear of successful contradiction: 1. ICANN, the enterprise, is a gift of our Uncle Sam, *the United States* *government*. 2. ICANN is *funded by **fees sourced from registries and registrars*. 3. *All ALS* whose representatives have ever attended an ICANN meeting or the GA *have accepted ICANN funds for travel support and hospitality*. 4. The RALO - *a metastructure without a legal personality* - *owes it legitimacy to the ALS* and not the other way around. Think it through. But on the preponderance of the evidence and application of Know Your Customer (KYC) principles, the ALS whose representative has ever attended an ICANN meeting have received and/or benefited from funds sourced from registries and registrars. Purity is not a sustainable operating principle of LACRALO or any other RALO, for that matter. We in LACRALO should cease to subscribe to a hypocrisy that is so acute. Or, let us be mute with malice. Think about this for a minute. This RALO is so committed to the personhood of the ALS that we are struggling to incorporate individual end users as members with standing and full membership if the person cannot be construed as an ALS. It is alleged that the candidate for Secretary-Elect, a member of an ALS in good standing, works for his living with a ccTLD. No group of other ALS have a duty to meddle in the internal affairs of a duly admitted ALS. Furthermore, it is emphatically not the business of any cabal of ALS to determine how that representative makes a living. So long as the RALO has a valid MOU with ICANN they are in good standing. Their representative, by extension, is in good standing. No cabal of ALS is authorized to and can legitimately exclude that ALS from fellowship by excommunicating its representative. Finally, the funding argument. This one reminds me of the anti-money laundering (AML) rules imposed on developing countries. I always say, tongue firmly in cheek, the fear appears to be competition for the major money laundering operations in London and Frankfurt and New York. TTCS asked a question about funding in the meeting I'm sure was lost. She asked whether any ALS has ever received a grant from a foundation funded by a corporation but for the fact the foundation has a separate legal personhood. She was desperately trying to invigorate the thinking. My reference to ICANN funding sources at the top is an attempt to further contextualize funding. In describing source of funds, my good friend Evan Leibovitch would insist on taking the logic one further step. In his view all the money to ICANN comes from end users as registrants. Registries and registrars are mere conduits. His logic is unassailable. Here is the closeout. Every single *functional* NGO/ALS in LACRALO, from Mexico in the North to Argentina in the South, has, at one time or other, received largesse originating in governments or corporations. DevNet is an ALS that by virtue of a valid MOU with ICANN, has *standing to associate* with the metastructure LACRALO. In my view, asking DevNet to certify its funding is prejudicial, egregious and faithless. Unless and until every single ALS is required to declare the same here and now, I would advise DevNet to answer any request with a single line; "*DevNet declares it stands by the terms of the MOU signed with ICANN as an ALS.*" We premised LACRALO's new beginnings on inclusion and good faith. To my mind what happened tonight was a malignant propensity to exclusion and faithlessness. At some point, we must begin to ask if this metastructure is worthwhile. Carlton Samuels ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* =============================