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

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

On 9 Oct 2008, at 12:32, Tim Ruiz wrote:

> If we have to resort to random selection or giggle tests, then we have
> no business accepting the funds.

I personally see no relation between the utility of a random method of  
selecting after the constituencies are determined their priorities and  
the notion of meriting support for council member travel.
>  Ken's ideas are the best way
> forward, or at least a good start,

Can you explain how his ideas would work in a way that was assuredly  
unbiased and objective?
Some questions that immediately occur to me:

How would you eliminate the ability of someone to put pressure on one  
of those selected for this independent committee?  What does it mean  
for there to be an independent committee within ICANN?  Can members of  
GNSO constituencies serve on this independent committee?  How are  
these committee members chosen?   Is their work transparent?

As for getting beyond the giggle test in determining need, how does  
one do that.  What sort of verification of someone's need will be  
required?  The get a loan for my daughter's college i had to prove  
need and todo so had to fill out the FAFSA ( see http://www.fafsa.ed.gov/before012.htm 
 for a sample worksheet).  Are you suggesting something similar.  If  
not, how do you prove need?
Or, how do we define need?  If I were a millionaire, but had no  
employer to send me would I be in need of support?  If I have an  
employer, but they are in bankruptcy proceedings, do I have need?
I believe these and many other similar questions would need to be  
answered for there to be an objective set of criteria that could not  
be gamed or be subjected to influence.

a.

note: for those who may not know the giggle test.  Basically someone  
says "I have need", and if they can say it without most people  
starting to giggle, then that need statement i accepted.