[NCUC-DISCUSS] Questions and talking points for ICANN CEO

Tue Aug 28 00:41:14 CEST 2018

There are a few people who do not support the continuation of the Intersessional, however a majority of the 2018 delegates rated it in its evaluation as being valuable and serving a purpose. There is not a formal NCSG position on the Intersessional, nor have we discussed the topic on the NCSG/NCUC mailing lists recently. The last time the topic was raised on our list, from what I recall, there was widespread support for its continuation.

Ayden

> On 28 Aug 2018, at 00:33, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I had the impression that we did. Tatiana, Rafik and I are in favor of every other year. I'll see if other pc members have an opinion but this was also discussed on the list. I believe it should be done every other year. Framing intersessional as a capacity building program is strange to me.
>
> Most members don't know what is going on in intersessional to have an opinion since it is for the leaders. And no its not upon us to make it better.. Year after year we tried and didn't work out. And I spent a lot of time and energy last year with the planning meeting etc. Doesn't work out. Only a handful of people are engaged with various matters and can speak up in these meetings. We don't need it every year. I have gotten most of the procedures done we needed through emails. Why do we have to meet with CSG every year? To say what we disagree on? We sure do know that. To work on NCPH stuff? We can get them done via email.
>
> I look at the NCPH mailing list and it looks very empty. Staff kept asking us for things and we responded briefly or rarely. It's another burden  On a bunch of volunteers. NCPH is not like council strategic meeting. Council members have to be involved with everything and have to work together. Ncsg and csg leaders don't in many respect and it leads to not having meaningful conversation. No concrete outcome has come out of any intersessional to date.
>
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 6:20 PM Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
>>> With regards to Intersession, NCUC EC has only discussed it in NCUC EC
>>> list yet but the consensus was to follow PC NCSG position.
>>
>> The NCSG PC does not have a position on the Intersessional.
>>
>> Ayden
>>
>>> On 28 Aug 2018, at 00:16, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all
>>>
>>> We just had the call, it was indeed quite interesting and I'll send
>>> the notes soon.
>>>
>>> With regards to Intersession, NCUC EC has only discussed it in NCUC EC
>>> list yet but the consensus was to follow PC NCSG position.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Renata
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 6:35 PM, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>>>> Thank you, Renata. I look forward to reviewing your call notes.
>>>>
>>>> I am curious as to what you will ask the CEO about capacity building when the NCUC has recently opposed the 2019 Intersessional.
>>>>
>>>> There was confirmed funding in the budget for the 2019 Intersessional and this represented an excellent opportunity for the NCUC to engage in internal capacity development.
>>>>
>>>> I am surprised that this funding was declined without first consulting with NCUC members. If the NCSG Finance Committee was consulted, I do not see any indication on their mailing list. In any case, I believe this decision should have been left to the new Executive Committee to make, and should have only been made after consulting with NCUC members.
>>>>
>>>> The Intersessional is what we make it. If it didn’t work this year, we should fix it for next year. To simply throw away the funding that was confirmed and allocated in the budget is, in my view, a dereliction of duty and will only cause the NCUC harm.
>>>>
>>>> I understand the thinking is, we will ask for the funding again in 2020. The Intersessional is currently a part of the core budget; if not used, the question in 2020 will be, why do we need the funding if you didn’t need it last year? I find it hard to imagine the funding will ever be made available again if turned down for 2019.
>>>>
>>>> I am disappointed that decisions to do with resources are being made without first consulting with NCUC members. I ask that this please change. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Ayden
>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Aug 2018, at 21:19, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear all
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for your responses to this. Call will be soon and I'll also
>>>>> use some of the notes of the previous discussions our members
>>>>> contributed in NCSG.
>>>>> I don't think we'll have a time to approach leadership renewal other
>>>>> than an update only.
>>>>> I will bring up the capacity buidling and I guess there will be lots
>>>>> to listen to
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Renata
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 4:39 AM, Benjamin Akinmoyeje <benakin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Chair,
>>>>>> Sorry for the late response, the already identified talking points look
>>>>>> alright to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However my addition to the talking point around Capacity Building will be to
>>>>>> encourage other stakeholders in ICANN to engage NCUC in their different
>>>>>> region actively.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>> Benjamin
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 10:02 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>>>> <bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any points you think should be considered by Renata in this call other
>>>>>>> than the ones listed by her ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Implementation of our new bylaws - Projects ongoing and challenges
>>>>>>> on initiatives which could support more policy work
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - Capacity building budget cuts - Results and planning for FY19
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - NCUC Leadership renewal - Noting that new leadership will be briefed
>>>>>>> on ongoing processes and will align goals with ICANN Org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>> Bruna
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Em seg, 20 de ago de 2018 às 16:03, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>>>>>>> <raquino at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dear members
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> NCUC Chair will have a phone meeting with ICANN CEO on Aug 27th.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please send in your suggestions for questions and talking points.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Remember each Constituency gets such meeting so some points which NCSG
>>>>>>>> may already be discussing you should weigh in whether it is important
>>>>>>>> for NCUC to reinforce or not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here are the points I thought we could bring up
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Implementation of our new bylaws - Projects ongoing and challenges
>>>>>>>> on initiatives which could support more policy work
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - Capacity building budget cuts - Results and planning for FY19
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - NCUC Leadership renewal - Noting that new leadership will be briefed
>>>>>>>> on ongoing processes and will align goals with ICANN Org
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Renata
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Bruna Martins dos Santos
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>>>>>> @boomartins
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
> --
>
> Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20180827/cb837032/attachment.html>