<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing list open]
- To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing list open]
- From: Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2008 13:53:48 -0700
We need to agree to what our over-arching objective is here.
We are not creating some new general "GNSO travel fund" that anyone
can apply for travel funds to attend an ICANN meeting, and if they
are poor enough, they get to go. This has been, and in my mind
should continue to be, an effort to fund the participation of the
GNSO Council at GSNO Council meetings.
The depth of the pockets of the individual councilors is not
relevant. We are funding the participation of an ICANN organ (GNSO
Council) - not specific people.
Robin
On Oct 9, 2008, at 1:34 PM, Ken Stubbs wrote:
Ken Stubbs wrote:
To the best of my knowledge, some recipients never even attempted
to show or even claim "need".
They just made the claim that they complied with ICANN policy and
never explained how they complied (where is the transparency there?)
that is beyond "giggle" approaching "laugher"
I would expect a certain amount of "lobbying" as it is just human
nature. The principle difference is the appearance of ability to
leverage
is significantly less with a body independent of council activities.
I would assume that the committee would be capable of developing
guidelines for requests that would be consistent with ICANN
policies developed
for travel subsidization.
Ken Stubbs
BTW...I would be inclined to believe that the the former chairman
of Lehman ($300+millions in compensation over the last 5 years)
would most probably not qualify for subsidy ......
nor would Bill Gates...
Avri Doria wrote:
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.
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.7.6/1716 - Release Date:
10/9/2008 9:44 AM
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 e: robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|