ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: FW: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing list open]

  • To: "gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: FW: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing list open]
  • From: "Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:38:42 -0700

Thanks Ken. I think the suggestion in 1. is a good start. I also agree
with the principles you state in 2.

Travel funds should only be provided to persons representing broad
community and individual user interests AND only then if "need" can be
demonstrated. (Must further define "need.")

Allocation of travel funds should not be decided by those who have the
opportunity to receive it. I still think the Council could be called on
the carpet so-to-speak for allowing Councilors slated to receive Cairo
funds to actually vote on that motion. I like the idea of a Travel
Support Committee as Ken suggests, but anyone serving on the committee
should not be eligible to receive the funds.

I don't go quite as far back as some of you, but it seems that one of
the ideas behind the original DNSO was that it and its constituencies
would be self-funded. Where did that change and why? When I look at the
roster of members for the BC, the IPC, the ISPC, the Registrars, and the
Registries, it is very clear that they have the means to be self-funded.
If the members of those constituencies do not feel funding their
Councilors travel to ICANN meetings is not important, then I think that
raises serious questions we should be asking about those constituencies
- their intent, their representativeness, etc. 


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: FW: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing
list open]
From: Glen_de_Saint_Géry <Glen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, October 04, 2008 10:31 am
To: "gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx" <gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>

Ken Stubbs wrote: 

Please post this to the travel wg list. i tried earlier but it evidently
my send never got thru

Ken Stubbs wrote: 

Fellow committee members, 

Here is a personal suggestion regarding the Travel Support policy and
it's administration as well as some personal observations . 
The proposed procedure is used currently by many non-profit public
institutions & organizations 
and could be very applicable as a model for managing these discretionary

1. Suggestions 
       Pool all proposed budgeted dollars for travel support to GNSO
>From this pool, fund travel for chairs of SO
Develop set criteria to be used by applicants from the GNSO  to
demonstrate need to apply for travel support funding
Applications for support would be submitted  through the GNSO
These requests would be given to a newly constituted Travel support
committee within ICANN (i.e.could be formed by a representative from
each SO, as well as the CFO), supported by staff,   to review the
Publish all information on any approved travel support (name of
recipient, affiliation, rationale, etc.) on ICANN website
Other procedures established relative to time line, funding limits,
payment process, etc. would apply
The essential key to this process is "Transparency" . This proposed
procedure insures this "Transparency" as well providing a definable
process for
assisting qualified persons who show a clear "need" for travel support.
This process can also help insure that funds are not just expended
because they are budgeted.

2. Personal Observations & Commentary:
Many of the parties on the names council are professional policy staff &
are being compensated as by their respective companies (i.e. Verizon,
British Telecom, Telstra, major law firms and large trade and
professional  associations like INTA or AIM) ,as part of their
job-related activities, to advocate and work within the ICANN policy
development process and for these parties, participation in ICANN
activities such as the names council are strictly job-related activities
and not personal volunteer actions (such as  those of the NomCOM
appointees). As such i feel that they should not receive travel support
for ICANN meetings.    
I fully subsidizing  persons representing  broad community and
individual user interests and feel that,  if they have an individual
need for travel assistance, 
it should be made on a case-by-case basis.
I also feel very strongly that authority to select recipients & fund
their travel support should NOT vest in the names council as a body or
with the Chair or Vice-chair.  
Optically, this could easily send a negative "self-interest"  message
the the general community. 


Ken Stubbs

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy