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

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Olga,

Yes, I think that¹s a good way to proceed.

Thanks,

Stéphane


Le 15/01/09 18:52, « Olga Cavalli » <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> a écrit :

> Hi,
> So if I hear no comments by tomorrow morning should I send the table to the
> council?
> Olga
> 
> 
> 2009/1/15 Robin Gross <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> This sounds like a good approach to me.  Mexico is fast-approaching.
>> 
>> Robin
>> 
>> On Jan 14, 2009, at 5:38 PM, Olga Cavalli wrote:
>> 
>>> Greg et al,
>>>  
>>> I suggest to send the table to the council list by tomorrow and ask each
>>> constituency to send their info by no later than Tuesday 20 of January.
>>>  
>>> Olga
>>> 
>>>  
>>>  
>>> 2009/1/14, Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> Olga et al,
>>>>  
>>>>       If all of us can agree on this approach, I guess the next step would
>>>> be to set a deadline and announce (on the Council email list) that each
>>>> constituency is asked to submit its list of candidates for travel support
>>>> (and what kind - full, hotel-only or flight-only) by that date.
>>>>   
>>>>  
>>>> Greg
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> To: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>  Cc: Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>; Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>;
>>>> gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>  Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2009 10:50:15 AM
>>>> 
>>>> Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] ICANN travel support for the Mexico City
>>>> meeting
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 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
>>>>> <http://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
>>>>>> <http://olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/> >
>>>>>>  To: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx <http://tim@xxxxxxxxxxx/> >
>>>>>> Cc: Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx <http://greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx/> >;
>>>>>> gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx <http://gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx/> ; Stéphane
>>>>>> Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> <http://stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx/> >; Olga Cavalli
>>>>>> <olgacavalli@xxxxxxxxx <http://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
>>>>>> <http://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 <http://tim@xxxxxxxxxxx/> >
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>  

> We might want to give preference to those constituencies
> that used fewer slots last time.

 
How about this:
 
NCUC ? 2
ISPC ? 2
RyC ? 2
BC ? 1
RrC ? 2
IPC ? 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 <http://greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx/> >
Date: Thu, January 08, 2009 3:16 pm
 To: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx <http://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 ? Economy

That is, the GNSO constituencies used the following numbers of travel
support "slots" (for a total of 9):

NCUC ? 2
ISPC ? 1
RyC ? 1
 BC ? 3
RrC ? 1
IPC ? 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







 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>  
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> 
>>>>  
>>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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
>> 
>> 
>>  
>> 
> 
>