[gnso-travel-dt] Re: Travel drafting team - some ideas after the conference call

[Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>]

Hi,

One additional question.  How much of the Old DNSO budget money is  
still available and which constituencies have it banked?
a.

On 15 Aug 2009, at 15:43, Olga Cavalli wrote:

> Hi,
> I hope you are doing well, I just finished listening to the  
> conference call recording. As per Avri´s request I am sending some  
> initial notes and ideas to share with you and see how to move forward.
> First let me summarize some comments made during the conference call:
>
> 1- Reasons for allocating additional funding for former councilors:
>
> 	• As this is a particular meeting with changes in structure,  
> continuity is pertinent for a small number of retiring councilors.
> 	• Could be good helping incoming councillors with the assistance of  
> former councilors.
> 	• It is very helpful having more than one representative of a  
> constituency in a face to face ICANN meeting.
> 2- Other ideas
>
> 	• New councilors could participate in conference calls prior to  
> Seoul, if we know who they are.
> 	• Could be good to have a clear understanding of how many would  
> need this funding.
> 	• There should be balance between limited funds and the need for  
> participation.
> 	• Constituencies usually deal with changes at the end of the year  
> and these changes should not be a problem.
> 3- Reasons for not  allocating additional funds on former councilors  
> attending meeting:
>         • This is not a special situation for spending money on coordination.
>
> I also used Rob´s document as a basis for a preliminary analysis of  
> how many former councilors would need funding for Seoul.
> In reviewing the list I found 10 possible councilors that may not be  
> present in the next meeting,( I excluded Noncom Appointees as their  
> participation follows the normal noncom appointing rules, please  
> tell me if this is a right assumption)
>         • Commercial Stakeholder group: 6 six
>         • Registries: 1 one
>         • Registrars: 2 two
>         • NCUC: 1 one
>
> I am attaching the file I drafted for reference.
>
> Some ideas on how to move forward:
>
> It could be convenient to determine how many former councilors  
> should need funding for Seoul.
> One idea could be to ask each constituency / stakeholder group about  
> this, specially taking in consideration that
>  "constituencies usually deal with changes at the end of the year  
> and these changes should not be a problem"
> Once we have a clearer idea of how many people should need extra  
> funding ,then we can ask ICANN Staff if this funding is feasible.
>
>
> Looking forward to receiving your comments.
>
> Best regards, have a nice weekend.
>
> Olga
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Olga Cavalli, Dr. Ing.
> www.south-ssig.com.ar
>
> <possible council list for seoul .doc>