Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Re: TRAVEL DRAFTING TEAM COMMENTS NEEDED - Travel funding request from the Vertical Integration WG co-chairs

[tim@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Thanks Maria. Completely agree.

Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: Maria Farrell <maria.farrell@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 13:58:46 
To: Stéphane Van Gelder<stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Avri Doria<avri@xxxxxxx>; <gnso-travel-dt@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-travel-dt] Re: TRAVEL DRAFTING TEAM COMMENTS NEEDED - 
        Travel funding request from the Vertical Integration WG co-chairs

Well that all sounds pretty reasonable to me: i.e. the travel can't be
supported this time but Avri's suggestion for making slots available could
help in the future.  It seems that the group can manage well enough without
a co-chair being physically present on this occasion, and there is no need
to risk adding a precedent to the ever-expanding set of exceptions and
emergencies.

All the best, Maria

2010/5/25 Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>

>
> Sorry, I absolutely did not need to imply that they were unwilling to pay,
> of course they may not have the means. As stated before, I don't even think
> there's any need for discussion on the fact that they are working to help
> Icann and therefore, whether they have the means or not, should not be
> expected to foot the bill for coming. On the other hand, if Icann puts on
> proper remote participation capabilities, they don't need to be physically
> there so that works as well. I can coordinate the meeting on the ground, if
> that is the option they run with.
>
> Stéphane
>
> Le 25 mai 2010 à 19:10, Avri Doria a écrit :
>
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Have the council liaison chair the meeting with the assistance of the
> Policy Staff coordinator for the Working Group?
> >
> > Note: it may not be a willingness to pay, it may also be the ability to
> pay.
> >
> > a.
> >
> > On 25 May 2010, at 13:07, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
> >
> >> What should we do if none of the co-chairs are willing to pay their own
> way to come?
> >>
> >> Le 25 mai 2010 à 18:31, Avri Doria a écrit :
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> If at least one of the co-chairs will be there. I am probably ok with
> the answer.  And assuming that there will be good remote facilities in the
> meeting room, the WG should be able to get by.
> >>>
> >>> a.
> >>>
> >>> On 25 May 2010, at 12:23, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> You make a good point and I was asking myself the same question. We
> can work on a long-term solution, but I frankly don't see any way of coming
> up with one for this short term need.
> >>>>
> >>>> I was thinking I should go back to the VI co-chairs and tell them that
> there's really nothing that can be done at such short notice.
> >>>>
> >>>> Do people agree with that approach?
> >>>>
> >>>> Stéphane
> >>>>
> >>>> Le 25 mai 2010 à 18:18, Avri Doria a écrit :
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 25 May 2010, at 09:16, Stéphane Van Gelder wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> But I think the important point here is: can the Council as a whole
> step in and donate a slot in cases such as these, and would that be a fair
> and practical way of dealing with issues such as this one?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Something like:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Every SG will donate N (orN/2 depending on the number of slots
> available to the SG) travel slots a year for emergency needs such as getting
> a WG chair to a meeting?  And if this is what the team decides I will take
> it back to the NCSG with my personal support (yes and including the
> recommendation that we would do our fair share)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> But who would go first to solve the issue this time?  Obviously
> sometimes the person is a member of a particular SG group so hopefully they
> can do this.  But sometime she or he won't be.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Otherwise, are there any suggestions on the way to solve this since
> mine seems so very shot down.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> a.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>