ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< 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: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:01:20 +0200

Sorry I missed the meeting again.

Has the groups covered the situation for the bicameral situation where constituencies will be f different size. Will the funds be split proportionally between the constituencies? And what happens wen a new constituency is brought on board in the middle of the year?

Also is there any indication of flexibility on the part of the staff policy in terms of how the monies are allocated?



On 23 Oct 2008, at 02:33, Olga Cavalli wrote:

As we will have our next call tomorrow, I thought it could be helpful to share with you some notes I have taken during our call last week.

Please take in consideration that these are only notes, and should not be considered as agreed principles or agreed ideas.


There is obligation to participate in meetings when recieving financing for attending them. Should there be guidelines for using funds or / and attending meetings? Should it be some feedback after the meetings? Or this brings a lot of work to council members... Constituencies should be free to allocate in a transpartent process a certain amount of founds assigned to them There should be flexibility for constituencies in using these funds, so they could decide
There should be an annual ammount  assigned per constituency.
The GNSO Council should not get involved as council in how these funds are used, once they are assigned to constituencies
Should there be a contingency budget?
What happens with other required face to face meetings like, for example, new gtlds?


2008/10/15 Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Dear collegues,
thanks a lot for those who participated in the call, we had a very interesting exchange of ideas.

Considering that our due date for the outcome report is November 21st, the proposed next steps are:

- Each of you will send some paragraphs related with the ideas that were rised during the call
- Once they arrive I will start drafting a document
- The document will be discussed in the list and during our next call
- Nex call date and time will be set up though a doodle that Glen will send, proposed dates are Wed 22, Thrusd. 23 or Fri. 24.

Ken, please coud you be so kind to send to the list the summary of issues that you expressed on the call? I think it was an excellent synthesis of many of the ideas that we exchanged.

Thanks to all and regards.

2008/10/15 Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>

> Avri wrote:
> 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?

Those questions get to my point about constituencies supporting
themselves. It's not about a single individual's financial ability,
or about their specific employer's financial situation. It's about
the membership of the constituency as a whole and whether or not
it is financially capable of funding its operation and
participation within the process. If, for good reason, it is not,
then that is an issue for a broader consideration regarding
financial assistance.

For example, if it is deemed vital to the best interests of ICANN
to have a registrants' constituency but funding its participation
is an issue, it may be decided that a certain level of financial
support is appropriate. But that should be decided on a
constituency by constituency basis, not on an individual
participant basis.


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Travel drafting team mailing
list open]
From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, October 09, 2008 3:00 pm
To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx

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
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.


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.

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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy