<html><body><font face="Tahoma" size="2"><div>Colleagues,</div><div><br></div><div>Much of the well deserved criticism of the proposed sale of PIR to Ethos Capital stems from the uncertainty as to the possible fate and treatment of the .org registry. Other than arguing that the sale of PIR to Ethos Capital should not go forward, there have been few proposed alternative ways forward. I do not think that "going forward" involves ISOC not selling PIR. That is well within their rights. It is important to put alternatives on the table,, so that Ethos Capital is not seen as the only (go/no go) option. In this article in CircleID I argue that whomever buys PIR, i should be either kept as a non-profit, or incorporated as a Benefit Corporation (B Corp). The Ethos Capital promise of B Corp Certification falls well short of that. <br></div><div><br></div><div>I also suggest several classes of other potential buyers who would be more likely to assure that the integrity of the .org registry would be preserved. I suspect that the original ISOC call for offers did not also involve pursuing potential pension fund, Sovereign fund, Charitable trust, and Philanthropic investors, all of which have adequately deep pockets and evidence-based records with regard to performance, trust and integrity. <br></div><div><br></div><div>See: <a href="http://www.circleid.com/posts/20191216_how_to_preserve_dot_org_registrys_integrity_in_isoc_sale_of_pir/">http://www.circleid.com/posts/20191216_how_to_preserve_dot_org_registrys_integrity_in_isoc_sale_of_pir/<br></a></div><div><br></div><div>Sam <br></div><br></font></body></html>