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

[Farell FOLLY]

Dear All,

I am not sure that we have a solution to that situation after David has been elected. Personally, I don’t like this situation at all, but the membership voted in favor as result of the election, and in our records show many times that we bring decisions to the membership to request membership consensus. Therefore, we should leave it like it. Actually, one or a few members can foresee and know what is good for the rest but might not be able to enforce in the practice. Ainsi Va la Vie!

My suggestion is to think about that for the Future, for instance; the NCSG PC, NCUC PC, NPOC PC or an ad hoc committee could validate every candidate before elections, just like an electoral committee dismisses or approves a candidate. 

But by now, we should give him the benefit of the doubt. 

@__f_f__

Best Regards
____________________________________

(Ekue) Farell FOLLY
NCUC Rep. to the NCSG Policy Committee
linkedin.com/in/farellf 






> On 10 Oct 2018, at 08:54, dorothy g <dgdorothydg at GMAIL.COM> wrote:
> 
> 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 <mailto:dave at davecake.net>> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 10 Oct 2018, at 10:53 am, Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com <mailto: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 <mailto:Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org>
> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss <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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20181010/4a441683/attachment.html>