[NCUC-DISCUSS] Intercessional

[Tapani Tarvainen]

The preparation process is already well in the way, it is
realistically too late for any really radical options.

Dropping the meeting altogether and replacing it with a virtual one is
not going to happen. From what I've heard, other constituencies in
NCPH, all in CSG as well as NPOC, want it, and special budget request
for it has been made and approved long time ago.

Of course NCUC could elect to stay away or participate only remotely,
but I don't think it'd stop the meeting from happening and certainly
NCUC would not get the travel money to use for other purposes.

Merging the meeting with a regular ICANN meeting, whether Copenhagen
or Johannesburg, isn't much more likely. Some CSG participants
(ISPs if I recall correctly) basically flat out vetoed the idea.

Such alternatives may be considered for the next time, indeed it might
be good idea to put them on the agenda of this meeting, but they're
not realistic now.

Location and exact timing are still in the air, however.

We clearly would like to get it out of the US, and that may be
possible, but not easy. And the further from USA we propose, the more
CSG will oppose it and the more likely we'll end up in the US after all.

I do appreciate that as seen from Africa or Asia or Australia it may
not make much of a difference whether the meeting is in USA or Europe,
but still I think there'd be useful symbolic significance in getting
it out of the USA at least, even if not very far from there.

As for Reykjavík:

Yes it'd be cold but not extremely so. Statistically there's only 10%
chance of being below freezing point and practically never below -7°C,
and its airport is less likely to be closed due to a snowstorm than
that of Washington DC. (Reykjavík gets fairly little snow given it's
latitude. I assume Bill's description of "a meter of snow" was
hyperbole, but even if it did happen, I'm sure Icelanders can clear
their streets and roads of snow as well as Finns can. Yes, I have
actual experience of over meter deep snow.)

It is also in general a fairly expensive city (Finnish government
rates it almost exactly same as Singapore, don't know why US thinks
there's such a big difference), but what matters there is the total
cost, including travel, hotels and meeting facilities, and it's not
high season there in February so they may be cheap. But I'm sure ICANN
travel staff is busy sorting it out and will tell us if it turns out
to be too expensive.

As for visas, USA isn't exactly easy either - in last intersessional
in LA two intended NCSG participants couldn't make it because of visa
problems. I have no reason to believe Iceland would be particularly
bad in that respect.

Outreach isn't a major focus of the intersessional, but I can't help
observing that political situation in Iceland has changed drastically
over just a few years, with Pirate Party likely to be in government
next year, and we might well find a surprising number of interested
civil society people there now.

And it would be easy enough to reach from the USA to make it palatable
to CSG. Yes, I know, a lousy reason, but realistically we have to make
that into account.

That said, on general principles I think we should not always settle
on "easy" locations, whether thinking of visa issues or average travel
distances or whatever. There is value in diversity and indeed in
demonstrating difficulties in different places, and I would not object
to a meeting in Hobarth or La Paz or Kigali or Ulan Bator, or for that
matter Verkhoyansk (that'd be cold enough even for Stephanie I think,
with temperatures regularly below -60°C).

But sometimes better is the enemy of the good, and while I have
nothing against proposing any alternate locations, if the real choice
ends up being between Reykjavík and USA, I'll vote for the former.

Is there anybody here who'd really prefer the US in that case?

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen