On the call a minute ago the subject of funding of the MGRC itself came up.
There is no direct provision in 1014 for this. To the best of my recollection this was to stop the MGRC from going rouge with the funds.
@amiller suggest that the ZFND contacting the MGRC. Is it possible the could get a grant instead for their operational needs?
It would give them a higher level autonomy and still give a mechanism for the ZFND to hold some kind of accountability.
I have no idea of the tax implications of this though, I would assume the MGRC would need to set up as a legal entity somewhere. idk. this is just an idea.
@amiller @nathan-at-least - I mentioned this in the chat, but couldnt the ECC or ZFND refuse to sign off on the network upgrade? I dont know enough about law aspect of the trademark. I know the intent of the trademark was to stop the other party erroneously modify the network or software. Does it also give you the ability to veto current network rules?
EDIT: Merged post.
The subject of how the MGRC is going to fund itself has come up again.
Do we need a separate zip that allocates some of the MG slice to the MGRC via the foundation? I don’t mind writing it.
realistically if any funding is going to happen this must be the easiest way. I don’t know the legal consequences of this though.
@daira how easy would it be to get this to activate along side NU4? I know proposals are locked, but can anything be done? Maybe put it in NU5 with retrospective action? I know you thought it didn’t need to be in the zip, no one really did. But it would be quicker for me to write a new zip and pr based of the info I find.
It is literally to cover what might be an oversight in how the MGRC gets funded from the ZFND. I am still digging through old discussions tho i might find a post / stream convo that clears this up.
What does everyone else think?