because all I saw in my mind was the arguing and fighting on the old site.
One major difference between this site, and e-sword-users.org, is that the latter did not discriminate on the basis of the theological orientation of resources. That policy gave rise to more contentition, and hate mail from users, than anything else that was done.
and squabble about budgets and meetings
I don't see how questions about funding a proposed organization could be called a "squabble".
Historically, sites created by users of e-Sword, have died two or three years after being setup.
I suggested a foundation, as that would, in theory, be a more stable organization, than an individual running things solo. Furthermore, an organzation could, in theory, provide more support, for more software, than an individual.
Mitagating against the idea of a foundation are:
- There are no independent organizations of Biblical software users;
- There are no incorporated non-profit organizations devoted exclusively to Biblical software;
- Other than The Sword Project, which is an unincorporated non-profit, all of the organizations that develop software are either LLC, sole-proprietary, or standard for-profit companies;
- Where/how it would be funded;
and drop dead dates
This is a standard technique used by organizations to ensure that their projects remain viable and relevant to the target group/purpose. The major downside of this approach, is that it prevents emotions and ego from keeping projects alive. If stated criteria are not met by a specific date, the project is killed, and can not be resuscitated. A secondary side-effect, is that if the wrong criteria are chosen, or the time frame in which to do things is miscalculated, the project can be prematurely terminated.
Probably saves lot of money by not trying to hire accountants and 'staff'
One of the reasons that e-Sword-users.org would not have been able to take advantage of DMCA safe harbour provisions, was that it did not hire anybody for that function. Whilst there are a few individuals willing to take on that responsibility gratis, they do so based on the prestige, and perceived value of the incorporated non-profit.
Like using a registered agent, virtually anybody can do the job, but the technical issues are such, that from a legal perspective, it is more prudent to retain a registered agent, than hiring and training one in-house, or doing it yourself.
and incorporate in places like Zimbabwe.
To not explore incorporation in different locales, and the virtues that they offer, demonstrates a lack of prudence.
With what was essentially designed and projected as virtual corporation, have no physical location, the different virtues offered by various countries, can have a practical effect on both long-term stability, and fund raising:
As one example, it is extremely difficult to dissolve an organization created as a Foundation under German Law. (It took until the late seventies to dissolve all of the foundations created by, or on behalf of the National Socialist Party, despite the law that ordered them to be dissolved being passed in the 1946 or 47. Thirty years to clear the legal, and other obstacles setup to prevent the dissollution of foundations, even with laws being passed that, theoretically, simplified and speeded up the process.)
As a second example, without the appropriate local registration, and license, organizations can not solicit anything, in most counties of the United States. Non-profit status, or lack thereof, is irrelevant. (JW and LDS workers are affected by these laws.)
As a third example, the incorporation process in New Zealand can be completed in a matter of hours. Literally file the paperwork in the morning, and receive their paperwork that afternoon. [This is one of the simplest, and fastest places in the world, in which to incorporate.]
As a fourth example, the incorporation process in some locales can take years, if the appropriate bribes are not paid to the appropriate people. Even then, the process can be delayed for ethnic, religious, or ideological reasons.
As a fifth example, Indonesia more or less prohibits foreigners from creating, or serving non-profits, if its purpose or function is, in any respect, antithecal to the intersts of Islam.