RE: [gnso-travel-dt] Notes after meeting in Mexico

[Zahid Jamil <zahid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with Tim.  There is no harm in clarifying this aspect.  I would also 
ensure some language to indicate Greg's suggestions are included.

Zahid Jamil
Barrister-at-law


-----Original Message-----
From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 16 March 2009 21:18
To: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Notes after meeting in Mexico

Thanks Tim,
other comments?
regards
Olga

2009/3/16 Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>

>
> I prefer to leave it in. While I agree with Greg, I am not that
> confident that ICANN sees things the same way, or even if they agree
> today that they won't view it differently later. In reality, it probably
> makes no difference one way or the other, but certainly doesn't hurt to
> have our view on the record.
>
> Tim
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Notes after meeting in Mexico
> From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sun, March 15, 2009 4:00 pm
> To: Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ken Stubbs <kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> Stéphane_Van_Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>,
> gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx, Zahid Jamil <zahid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks Greg,
> reading your comments, should you suggest to delete the sentence:
>
> Travel funding should not impact registrar or registry fees.?
>
> What do others think?
> Regards
> Olga
>
> 2009/3/15 Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@xxxxxxxxx>
> Tim/Ken,
>       I thought we had gone over this before.  There is no connection;
> that is, there is no need to fund increased travel by decreases in other
> expenditures.  Even a cursory glance at ICANN's  budget reveals that an
> extra $200K (say) for extra Council travel is about 0.35% of the
> operational budget.  Meanwhile the surplus (the difference between
> projected revenues and projected expenses) is in the millions, even
> after taking into account other (non-operational) expenses and provision
> for a "reserve".  There is no way extra travel funds would impact
> Registry or Registrar fees - the extra funds are a "rounding error" in
> the scheme of things.
>
> Greg
>
> PS:  And there is no way, either, that ICANN will abolish or decrease
> its existing travel budget for *other* parties, such as fellowships,
> NomCom members, ALAC and NomCom appointees - there are just too many
> stakeholders!
>
>
> From: Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Olga Cavalli <olgac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Ken Stubbs <kstubbs@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Stéphane_Van_Gelder
> <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>; gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx; Zahid Jamil
> <zahid@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 9:06:20 AM


[The entire original message is not included]