[NCUC-DISCUSS] David and his many positions at NCUC/NCSG/NPOC

[dorothy g]

Dear Friends,  These exchanges are not helping to build our community.
Also certain language and accusations have been made by some parties that
are not helpful. Please stop and let us get on with the main tasks. If
there are serious procedural concerns we should be clear on what exactly
needs to be changed and why without personalising the situation. I believe
our two communities work together and we should not squabble over travel
support.This is petty. Let us appreciate that different members of the
community contribute in different ways. Someone was elected. If the rules
made them ineligible that should have been sorted out before the election.
Let us move on.
Farzaneh, Thanks for objecting to those 'gender-biased' adjectives. Women
should not be bullied into silence. As I have said earlier we will miss
you. We may not always agree but I have always found you to be professional
in your approach.
David let me say that most of us are looking forward to you making stellar
contributions during your term.  This remains the best way to silence
detractors.

best regards

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 6:37 AM David Cake <dave at davecake.net> wrote:

>
>
> On 10 Oct 2018, at 10:53 am, Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix <
> rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> wrote:
> The only certainty I have in the current case is that out of fairness, it
> should not be possible to pile up travel grants by virtue of holding
> multiple positions. Again, I do not know whether this has occurred or is
> occuring in our present case.
>
> And what I understand here as "piling up" is not having several
> opportunities to obtain travel funds for one given meeting, but actually
> obtaining more than "one" allocation of travel funds through the multiple
> hats or getting travel funds more often than others just by virtue of
> holding several positions. I do not know what coordinating mechanisms there
> are between NCSG/NPOC/NCUC as far as travel grants are concerned, and
> whether there are rules as to "who pays" (or who *should *pay) for people
> with multiple hats, but that is also something that could and should be
> discussed.
>
>
> Travel funding is a complex issue, but I do not believe that acquiring
> multiple travel funding without re-allocation is likely to happen within
> our current SG system. There are some slight wrinkles here and there (such
> as using funds from one sources to top up travel support from another, as
> has happened for various reasons when ICANN funding does not cover a full
> meeting or meeting associated events), but I certainly do not anticipate
> that the amount of travel resources available overall will be in any way
> reduced.
> There are also, of course, funding for various special purpose roles
> within ICANN (such as WGs, mentoring, etc), but they each have separate
> rules.
>
> David
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20181010/63edf953/attachment.html>