At 11:56 AM -0400 10/5/07, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Hi Adam,
The summit is a great idea. Agree with Ross, it's not something to let drop. But I'm also not well up on events so far, what's been planned and discussed and what's not. The details that have been done to date are on the ICANNWiki at http://www.icannwiki.org/index.php/At-Large_Global_Summit and something resembling a summit outline is at http://www.icannwiki.org/index.php/ICANN_Ensemble
Evan, thanks. And sorry for a slow reply. I'd read the wiki pages and word doc that was sent around on the ALAC list. But I misunderstood the following:
How many people might be expected to attend? How many parallel sessions (i.e. how many rooms for how many people for how many days.)
The original plan was for one person per ALS to be funded. After staff objected on a number of levels, we suggested that it may be reasonable to only fund delegates from ALSs which had demonstrated they had done at least minimal preparatory work to familiarize themselves with relevant issues.
I didn't realize the proposal was a summit for ALS members. The ICANN Ensemble describes "A global summit of the ICANN At-Large community". I took that to mean an event targeted at interested individual users (which is what the At-Large community is), rather than just the ALS. So this Summit of ALS would be in addition to the 20 (ish) ALS representatives attending each ICANN meeting? Where's the value in that? I do think a Summit is a good idea, but suggest it should focus on users rather than ALS. More to say. But seems better under a new subject line. Best, Adam
What's ICANN's and the ALAC's budget cycle? The only ICANN organization I've worked with closely is the NomCom, and budget for that runs July to July. How would something the Summit get into the budget planning process? ICANN staff have repeatedly refused any budget related inquiries.
If not Paris then the next stop would be somewhere in Africa, which makes travel more expensive (less of a hub.) After that Latin America, Asia Pacific and Europe as the three meetings for 2009. Indeed, one of our considerations for holding it at the Paris event was the city's status as a major airline hub, meaning that holding a summit there would be far less expensive than at most other cities (indeed, how many African delegates would need to fly through Paris to anywhere else?)
Asia Pacific is only suitable if the meeting is in a major hub such as Hong Kong or Singapore, and even then would be more expensive for travel overall compared to a major city in Europe or North America. This essentially means that, if Paris doesn't work the next opportunity to _economically_ stage a Summit would be late 2009.
- Evan