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

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

As I have said before and consistent with the RyC position, there is a 
potential conflict when individuals are representing their organization 
interests and being subsidized by general registrant funds.  If those who are 
being so subsidized are willing to fairly represent the interests of all 
registrants and not just the interests of their respective organizations and 
constituencies, then the conflict would be minimized.  Board members are 
required to represent the interests of the Corporation and hence the interests 
of the broader Internet community rather than their own interests or the 
interests of those organizations with which they are affiliated.  That is not 
the case of GNSO participants and I am not advocating that it should be, but 
that is the source of the conflict to which I am referring.  How do we deal 
with that?
 
Chuck


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:owner-gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Greg Ruth
        Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 10:15 AM
        To: Robin Gross; gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing 
list open]
        
        

        I agree with Robin.  Moreover, I am nonplussed by Tim's emphasis on 
"need".  Travel support for the Board or for NCAs is not based on need.  And it 
would be insulting (and absurd) to ask anyone to "demonstrate" need.  The GNSO 
travel support is not a fellowship or charity, it is support specifically for 
those who are engaged in the policy making work of the GNSO, enabling them to 
attend face-to-face meetings.  I believe that it is up to the individual 
constituencies to decide how best to use these funds to enable their 
representation in this work.

        
         

        ----- Original Message ----
        From: Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
        To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Sent: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 10:13:40 PM
        Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing 
list open]
        
        
        I have a different take on the GNSO travel policy.  My first preference 
is for all travel funds to be specifically allocated to GNSO Councilors to 
participate in GNSO meetings.

        If that is not possible, then constituencies should be permitted to use 
their travel funds as they choose to send the members they feel they need at 
the meeting.   It should not be up to a committee of all constituencies to 
decide who to send to represent any particular constituency.  Constituencies 
are in the best position to know how to use their funds (rather than 
well-meaning members of other constituencies).

        Thanks,
        Robin


        On Oct 4, 2008, at 8:31 AM, Glen de Saint Géry wrote:


                
                 
                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 expenses.
                
                
                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 
Secretariat
                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 applications
                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. 
                
                Regards,
                
                
                Ken Stubbs
                
                
                
                


        



        IP JUSTICE
        Robin Gross, Executive Director
        1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
        p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
        w: http://www.ipjustice.org <http://www.ipjustice.org/>      e: 
robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx