Re: [gnso-travel-dt] ICANN travel support for the Mexico City meeting

["Olga Cavalli" <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I fully agree with your comments Greg.

Regards
Olga

2009/1/14, Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>:
>
> That seems like a perfectly sensible approach.
>
> Stéphane Van Gelder
>
>
> Le 14/01/09 16:18, « Greg Ruth » <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit :
>
>  We seem to have general agreement to something like the table Tim and
> Olga have provided.  We now have about a week to go till the 22 January
> deadline.
> Unless there is further discussion, perhaps a good way to proceed would to
> be to call for each constituency to put forward by some date (say Friday or
> Monday) its list of candidates for Mexico City travel support.  We can then
> see what that adds up to and where we stand (i.e. whether it all evens out,
> or we need more slots than ICANN is providing).  Does this seem like a
> sensible approach?
> Greg
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Cc:* Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>; gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx; Stéphane
> Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>; Olga Cavalli <
> olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 12, 2009 10:42:57 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [gnso-travel-dt] ICANN travel support for the Mexico City
> meeting
>
> Hi,
> I have drafted a small table containing the name of constituencies and the
> funded travellers in Cairo and Tim proposal for Mexico, I also added in the
> right a column with the possible total funded travellers per constituency.
>
> We should exchange ideas fast as constituencies must decide by Jan 22nd.
>
> Have a good week and regards to all.
>
> Olga
>
> *Constituencies* *Cairo meeting* *Mexico meeting* *Tim Proposal* *Total
> per constituency*
> NCUC 2 2 4
> ISPC 1 2 3
> RyC 1 2 3
> BC 3 1 4
> RrC 1 2 3
> IPC 1 2 3
>
> *Total* *9* *11* *20
> *
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2009/1/9, Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Hi,
> Thanks Tim and Greg for starting the exchange of ideas again.
>
> Glen, could you please add Stephane Van Gelder to this drafting group?, as
> requested yesterday on the call.
>
> Should we need to set up a date/time for conference call or just work
> online on the list?
>
> Regards and have a nice weekend!
>
> Olga
>
> 2009/1/8 Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> > We might want to give preference to those constituencies
> > that used fewer slots last time.
>
>
> How about this:
>
> NCUC ˆ 2
> ISPC ˆ 2
> RyC ˆ 2
> BC ˆ 1
> RrC ˆ 2
> IPC ˆ 2
>
> Then leave it up to the constituencies whether or not to split up the
> funds. They could either fund two people fully or one full and two
> split. The BC (who had three fully funded last time) could fund one
> fully or one for airfare and a second for the lodging per diem.
>
> Tim
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [gnso-travel-dt] ICANN travel support for the Mexico City
> meeting
> From: Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, January 08, 2009 3:16 pm
> To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
>
> All,
>        I would observe that ICANN funded travel support for the Cairo
> meeting (excluding NCAs) was as follows.
>
> Gross, Robin - NCUC - Constituency 1st choice - Economy
> Harris, Tony - ISPC - Constituency 1st choice - Economy
> Hoover, Carolyn - RyC - Constituency 1st choice - Economy
> Jamil,Zahid - BC Financial Need - Economy
> Klein, Norbert - NCUC - Financial Need - Economy
> Rossette, Kristina - IPC - Financial Need - Expenses Only
> Rodenbaugh, Mike - BC - Constituency 1st choice - Economy
> Sheppard, Philip - BC - Complies with ICANN policy - Economy
> Walton, Clarke - RrC - Constituency 1st choice ˆ Economy
>
> That is, the GNSO constituencies used the following numbers of travel
> support "slots" (for a total of 9):
>
> NCUC ˆ 2
> ISPC ˆ 1
> RyC ˆ 1
> BC ˆ 3
> RrC ˆ 1
> IPC ˆ 1
>
> Therefore, out of the 20 slots allotted by ICANN for consituency travel
> to the Cairo and Mexico City meetings, theoretically 11 are still
> available for travel to the Mexico City meeting.
>
> We might want to give preference to those constituencies that used fewer
> slots last time.
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>