Hi All,

I want to take a different view with respect to a number of Marilyn’s examples. The distinction I would like to draw is programs for the benefit of ICANN vs. programs for the benefit of the Internet. These are not the same thing and I believe we need to resolve this fundamental question.

I believe the point of this exercise is clearly to promote programs for the benefit of the Internet more broadly. A number of the examples below deal with items that benefit ICANN directly and may or may not benefit the Internet.

Participation broadly in ICANN matters is clearly about the institution itself and clearly should be within the operating budget. The last numbers I heard were that in some meetings as many as 25% of participants received funding. We should get current data to inform this discussion. I am in favour of this funding and would LOVE to see it more focused (needs-based rather than “earned” through position).

Coming from a constituency that suffers in having to respond to those who are much more well-funded than us I appreciate the importance AND this is not at all what the auction proceeds were intended to address. This is a very important discussion and I am surprised we are still here this late in the game.

EN

On Apr 9, 2019, at 12:19 AM, Mei Lin Fung <mlf@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

I support Marilyn's suggestion - it is so important that people who cannot otherwise afford to - get the chance to participate in international gatherings - we lose something when only those who can afford to speak up, contribute their experience.

For connecting the unconnected, we need to hear from them, engage with them, involve them in design and decision making - taking the effort and spending the money to do it is even more important for ICANN since the for profit companies are driven by the profit motive and self interest.

When women are elected, but lack the skills, and we do nothing to support them - that is a waste not just of a single women, but the women of an entire country who could have benefited by having a woman's voice and leadership in the highest circles in the country.

Women speak up and advocate for families, for the children, for the elderly, for future generations - this is an inconvenient truth in circles where they are the minority, and sometimes the only one in the room. Yet society needs this advocacy.

If ICANN with the blessing of auction proceeds does not support helping the currently excluded have a seat at the table, then who will? if not now, when?

On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 6:32 AM Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> wrote:
I do have some suggestions that do not need to replace the "example" list but augment it

I propose a short discussion on the following as one of the small group drafters:

Example: ICANN has cut short funding for CROP, which is a program available to each constituency/SG, that used to have up to five annually, with 1 -2 out of region, to do awareness/recruitment. It is now only 3, and in region.

My suggestion is that funding applications from constituencies/SGs/SO/ACs that are similar in purpose should be accepted if they meet the "consistent with ICANN's core mission and activities" criteria. 

Rationale:
Building awareness and recruitment into engagement at ICANN takes many forms, and the Fellowship Program is not really. an effective modality for the BC, or the contracted parties, as analysis of that program shows, even as it brings different value.  Bringing a speaker with expertise to a national or sub regional event that can explain ICANN from the "community" perspective brings significant value. Proposals could be limited in number and limited to $5,000 per event. 

Example: ICANN has cut and limited community funding for bringing together community groups at external IG events such as Internet Governance Forum; RIR events; IEEE and IETF events -- all of which build engagement. Events that are domain registry/registrar focused are assumed not to need funding but in reality, to build the DNS business in developing countries and LDCs, some travel sponsorships for qualified and committed participants could spark more DNS suppliers back at the national and sub regional levels. 

Applications for engagement in a wide number of events -- ranging from IGF, to national and sub regional IGFs, to technical events, to specially focused DNS business development events with rationale for benefit and contribution to the ICANN mission and core principles should be accepted

Note: Although ICANN Org Engagement seems to have pretty unlimited funding for their staff and for Board members to travel, without much transparency, programs that support the community continue to be cut.

Example: Community engagement in standards entities -- ranging from WWW, to IETF, to IEEE to new approaches, such as Moz:lla's work on Ethics in AI

Proposals that support engagement and even hosting of events that broaden and deepen engagement are great examples that could be supported

Example: Scholars focused on research that advance technical areas that affect ICANN's mission and core activities. 

This would require advice from SSAC and other experts, including from IAB/IETF, WWW; IEEE, and more but could provide a category that applications could be submitted

Example: National and sub regional activities that affect the Internet and ICANN's core mission
This is already addressed, I think. but just want to reinforce it as a core priority

Example: Advancing how Youth and Children  can benefit from the Internet 
I am not going to elaborate much on this but it could be access projects that connect the unconnected; it could e about bringing in youth voices to ICANN or other IG events that ICANN participates in, such as the national IGFs.

Example: Engaging elected and appointed policy makers -- advancing awareness 
Increasingly, elected and appointed policy makers are asking how to regulate the Internet and this affects ICANN's role.  Examples like the Internet Congressional Caucus and a similar initiative in Europe have brought parliamentarians forward as champions of the Internet and ICANN.  Proposals from a national level to engage with Parliamentarians and key Ministries at the national level to advance endorsement of ICANN's role should be accepted. 
From: Ccwg-auctionproceeds <ccwg-auctionproceeds-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of Johan Helsingius <julf@julf.com>
Sent: Monday, April 8, 2019 2:35 AM
To: ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
Subject: Re: [Ccwg-auctionproceeds] Updated templates and action items
 
On 07-04-19 23:03, John R Levine wrote:

I agree 100% with John.

        Julf

> UASG always ends the year with unspent money.  It doesn't need any more,
> and I hope it goes without saying that auction proceeds shouldn't replace
> existing ICANN funding.
>
> I think the example list is fine and would prefer to accept it and move
> on.
>
> R's,
> John
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://nam03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fccwg-auctionproceeds&amp;data=02%7C01%7C%7C3caff029e08c426fdf4c08d6bbec6b59%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636903021439223014&amp;sdata=kvv0pgFGlFdyP4ZEigt8dGmjrY%2F%2FCqv8tRodSJidk0Y%3D&amp;reserved=0
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds


--
Mei Lin Fung
Unit Coordinator, California Health Medical Reserve Corp
Secretary of the Board, co-founder, People Centered Internet
External advisor to the Stanford University Center for Population Health Science
Member of the Steering Committee, World Economic Forum, Internet for All

(t) meilinfung
_______________________________________________
Ccwg-auctionproceeds mailing list
Ccwg-auctionproceeds@icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ccwg-auctionproceeds