meetings allocations are fast approaching.
Right, that's my concern. Regardless of my personal feelings, if we're going to do this there needs to be time for the constituencies to make decisions/arrangements. The response from Doug was that it was still all or nothing for now, but the Staff would see if they could work something different out. That's why we went with the somewhat highlevel principles below. So for now there may be accompanying instructions that fit the current situation, but they could be modified later if there is more flexibility without having to modify the Council approved principles. So once the principles are approved, we just need to know how much is available to split between the constituencies and draft an explanatory note on how they indicate how (or for whom) they are going to use the funds. Tim -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Travel support draft text From: Avri Doria <avri@psg.com> Date: Wed, December 10, 2008 4:21 pm To: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Hi, I believe the next step, once we have a document that is stable from the drafting team and has all the edits people on the council want to contribute, is to have a motion on making this the GNSO policy on distributing the funds. I also think it would probably be good to get constituency and public feedback on this motion and the document before we vote. We also need to make sure that we understand the conditions under which the staff will allow the constituencies to:
The use of travel support funds is to be solely determined by each constituency independently as it sees fit to most effectively progress the work of the GNSO.
Ie. are we still under the all or nothing regime or has the staff decided to allow room, expense and travel to be allocated separately by the constituencies. I understand they have not accepted a proposal to allow the funds to be allocated directly by the constituencies (or do I misunderstand). We also need to get this done soon, as the next meetings allocations are fast approaching. a. On 10 Dec 2008, at 17:01, Tim Ruiz wrote:
Agree. So what are the next steps?
Tim
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] Travel support draft text From: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Date: Wed, December 10, 2008 12:34 pm To: Greg Ruth <greg_ruth@yahoo.com> Cc: Olga Cavalli <olgac@fibertel.com.ar>, Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be>, Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org>
Yes, this change makes sense.
On Dec 10, 2008, at 10:19 AM, Greg Ruth wrote:
I agree with this change.
Greg From: Olga Cavalli <olgac@fibertel.com.ar> To: Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be> Cc: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 1:11:12 PM Subject: Re: [council] Travel support draft text
Phillip, yo make a good suggestion. I personally agree. If I do not hear any other comments I will rewrite the draft document. We should review this issue during our next conference call. Best Olga
2008/12/8 Philip Sheppard <philip.sheppard@aim.be> Olga, thanks for circulating this. Seems fine. On reporting I think we can be transparent without being bureaucratic and burdensome on volunteers. There is no merit in 15 Council members all writing a report saying "I attended a Council meeting". Moreover, I presume the system is that Constituencies nominate who gets the support but then the individual still needs to apply to ICANN staff for that support ? If so staff is fully informed of who gets what and other staff is fully informed of who attended what. Suggest the following instead: Philip
-------------------- Transparency and Reporting: ICANN staff will publish the names of all those who receive travel support together with a list of the relevant meeting(s) for which the support was given and which were attended by the support recipient.
IP JUSTICE Robin Gross, Executive Director 1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451 w: http://www.ipjustice.org e: robin@ipjustice.org