Memorandum

1. The Core Infrastructure Conflict

Following recent debates regarding the transition of our video conferencing platforms, it is necessary to plainly address the immediate financial and ethical realities of our current software licenses. While the pursuit of fully independent, self-hosted infrastructure remains a valid long-term goal, our short-term operational decisions cannot ignore who benefits from our existing platform expenditures.

2. BlackRock and the Zoom Ecosystem

Our continued use of Zoom directly intertwines our organization's infrastructure capital with BlackRock, one of Zoom’s largest institutional shareholders. BlackRock is widely documented as a noted war profiteer, maintaining massive, expanding ETF investments in the global military-industrial complex and major defense contractors^[1]. When we pay for commercial Zoom licenses, we are subsidizing these specific financial entities. We can debate the technical nuances of various digital platforms indefinitely, but we must acknowledge where our treasury funds are flowing.

3. The Open-Source Foundation of Google Meet

By contrast, transitioning to Google Meet offers a highly accessible bridge that relies on fundamentally different technological architecture. While Google is undeniably a massive corporate entity, Google Meet is built directly upon the WebRTC open-source framework^[2]. Leveraging a tool based on an open-source standard provides better alignment with our technical principles while immediately halting the flow of our licensing capital to platforms heavily backed by military-industrial financiers.

ITS ABOUT THE MONEY.