response 101 of 154:

Mar 28 00:29 UTC 1996

Oh goodness gracious. rcurl is the bearer of wisdom. Non Profit, and not for
profit are synonymous, as far as I know. Depends on the draftsperson and
typist. Non Profit, nonprofit, not for profit, are NOT the same as TAX-EXEMPT.
Non profit status is a function of the state (in this case), and can still
denote an organization subject to paying federal taxes. The federal government
controls the rules for tax-exempt status, and you gotta play thier game if
you want to have that benefit. There are costs, of course, either way.
Nonprofits can make lots of money, by the way. Non profits can own profits,
and there are other wierd relationships in business and tax. Ain't simple.

response 103 of 154:

Mar 28 01:09 UTC 1996

  okay thanks for clarifying that, I was confused.  But even all-white
churches dont say they are all-white by doctrine, or they would be
refused tax-exempt status.  Granted, there is some gray area there and
in other cases, but generally speaking tax-exempt status is a tool
used by the government to get policy effected in private groups.  This
has caused obvious problems.  Such as when the DoJ said the Boy Scouts
had to admit athiests even though its charter and everything about the
Boy Scouts is christian oriented and motivated.  Unfortunately, at least
in my view, the supreme court overruled the DOJ in that case.

Query:  Does er...can Grex make tax deductions for business expenses for
things like say costs related to installation of the Sun04? I would 
imagine there are more than enough legal ways for Grex to avoid taxes.

response 105 of 154:

Mar 28 01:13 UTC 1996

  How do yu bring in thousands of dollars in memberships and donations
and not pay taxes? I hope grex isnt inviting an audit...dont need the
IRS going through the books!

response 107 of 154:

Mar 28 02:34 UTC 1996

Being non-profit is no big deal.  Anybody can start a non-profit corporation
overnight without straining themselves.  Being tax-exempt is quite another
matter, and requires that you fight some your way through a thorny
bureaucracy.  Arbornet, which runs M-Net, is non-profit and tax-exempt. 
Cyberspace Communications, which runs Grex, is just non-profit.  As near as
I can tell, we could probably acheive tax-exempt status, if we had a brave
soldier willing to take on the bureaucrats.  The biggest advantage with being
tax-exempt is not so much that we don't have to pay taxes, but that people
who donate stuff to us can absolutely positively write those donations off
on their taxes.  Without that status, it is less clear.  Opinions seem to
differ.  Being tax-exempt can help a lot to encourage donations.

response 109 of 154:

Mar 28 04:53 UTC 1996

        Yeah but I think part of the point of FWs is to save the already
overburdened staff the extra work of maintaining conferences.  I also
see it as a bit of a perk for founding or being an active member of a
conf.

response 111 of 154:

Mar 28 07:05 UTC 1996

One point of trivia:  As a non-profit Michigan corporation, grex should not
have to pay MI sales tax...

response 113 of 154:

Mar 28 16:50 UTC 1996

Re MI Sales Tax: exemption is not automatic. One must apply for State
Sales Tax Exemption, and one always gets turned down. Then one appeals,
and must have a face-to-face meeting with a review board. *Then* one gets
sales tax exemption. (I think I recall it isn't even forever now - one
must apply to renew.)

On the other hand....several companies will privately exempt a non-profit
federally tax exempt corporation from MI sales tax, asking only for the
"tax number" - which is the IRS "Employer's Identification Number" and has
nothing to do with tax exemption, federal or state. I presume that those
companies pay the sales tax themselves - if they don't, they are breaking
the law. I know a case where a non-profit, federally tax exempt
organization, got MI sales tax exemption, and brought that certificate in.
The company had never seen one, and said "all we need is your IRS number".
Heh. [Office Max is one company that privately exempts non-profit
federally tax exempt organizations from MI sales tax.]

response 115 of 154:

Mar 28 21:41 UTC 1996

  davel, grex bureacracy already exsists...it takes two seconds to
kill an item, so it is not an overburden to cfadmin to handle this. 
Why this is desireable is to keep fw's from abusing their positions
in the ways described earlier in this item, as happened in AD. But
this is basically going back to the question I asked earlier, which is
"do fair witnesses own their confs?"   I dont believe an fw owns a
conf anymore than I believe architechts own the buildings they
design.  This a public board, designed to be shared by whosoever
wishes to share in it.  If the computers and the drives and the 
money raised are all commonly held by the members, then why does
this philosophy not extend to the confs.

davel, why dont you just admit that you'd prefer it if every conf was
closed and that admittance to each conf was the personal prerogative
of the fw.  If you believe the fw owns his/her conference, then this
has to be what you really want.  Admit that in your opinion, since you
believe an fw should be able to kill or otherwise censor any item,
thus limiting anyone's participation in their conf, that fw's should
be able to control who can join at all.  After all, if an fw can
decided who can participate in his conf via using the /kill comnmand,
why shouldnt he be allowed to decide who reads it?

This is inconsistent policy.  The confs are either open for everyone to
share in equally or they are not.  It isnt the fair witness who should
decide whether this user or that user should be able to participate
in their conf.   The /kill command gives the fw that ability, and 
that is why it is clearly desireable to limit use of this command.

response 117 of 154:

Mar 29 01:03 UTC 1996

Yeah, Dave, you ....   ;)

Seriously, kerouac, do you really think cfadm has time to *follow* all the
conferences and look for inappropriate items?  Or kill them at request without
being familiar with each conference to know if it *was* an appropriate kill?
*I* am cfadm, and I sure don't have the time...

response 119 of 154:

Mar 29 03:49 UTC 1996

        Kerouac I'm really puzzled why you want to add an extra layer
of bureacracy to Grex.  Who says conf administrators are going to do
anybetter job managing confs than fws???  They would probably do a worse
job since they don't have as much knowlodge about a conf as the fw does.
Remember the old Roman saying "who's going to gaurd the gaurds."

response 121 of 154:

Mar 29 12:10 UTC 1996

Well, Wallner (heck, you use *my* last name for no apparent reason ;) ), you
may have missed my point a bit.  What if somebody else in AfterDark had sent
me mail saying "Kerouac's new item doesn't belong", would I just kill it? 
That sounds even worse than having FW's on the loose.

response 123 of 154:

Mar 29 14:42 UTC 1996

<robh is about ready to get out the fluffy pillows and start
torturing people with them.  "Confess!  Confess!">