At 1:44 PM -0400 8/28/09, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
Adam Peake wrote, On 28/8/09 03:06:
At Large Summit working groups 1 and 4 made reference to these meetings:
WG1: "For regional meetings, all members of Bylaw-recognized bodies from that region should receive travel and expense support on the same basis and to the same extent as at International Meetings." OK, was this Toronto meeting a "regional meeting", as envisioned by by WG1 or rather a meeting of the staff with a specific group on a specific topic ?
The Toronto meeting was explicitly designed for contracted parties. There are indeed two separate issues here:
1) That this should have been an open meeting that could be attended by us even if it was not targeted to us
2) That this might have been a convenient time and place to co-locate a RALO regional meeting, as ICANN staff were already attending, preferential hotel rates had been negotiated, etc.
My immediate issue is (1), the secrecy of the event. After we get past that issue -- as well as those related to funding At-Large regional events -- we can talk about co-locating our regional events next to those held for contracted parties.
Some information about the Toronto meeting available: <http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-2-25aug09-en.htm> Whatever... my main concern is also with the secrecy of these events. They might or might not be relevant to other constituencies, but if we are to every find out at a minimum they should be listed on the ICANN meeting schedule with the meeting theme/reason and agenda published well in advance. Once information about the meeting is available we'd be in a better position to judge if At Large and others should attend. Adam
- Evan
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac