[Ec-ncuc] [Pc-ncuc] letter to the Board regarding travel allocations

[Konstantinos Komaitis]

May I please request that we all try to calm down - this is what many would hope it would happen and I will not give them the pleasure of seeing us arguing about this. I think that the letter concerning the travel allocation should come from the NCUC and also Milton and Rafik can sign it as members of NCSG EC. I think the confusion here is that Bill's travel allocation was decided as an internal matter (because of the things that Bill explains so eloquently) whilst Rafik's and Rosemary's were decided by NCSG EC. The important issue here is to send something out - preferably something that is not long and confusing. 

So, what about this as a compromise - taking on board all the comments so far and also the need to make a strong statement!

KK

Dr. Konstantinos Komaitis,

Senior Lecturer,
Director of Postgraduate Instructional Courses
Director of LLM Information Technology and Telecommunications Law
University of Strathclyde,
The Law School,
Graham Hills building, 
50 George Street, Glasgow G1 1BA 
UK
tel: +44 (0)141 548 4306
http://www.routledgemedia.com/books/The-Current-State-of-Domain-Name-Regulation-isbn9780415477765
Selected publications: http://hq.ssrn.com/submissions/MyPapers.cfm?partid=501038
Website: www.komaitis.org


-----Original Message-----
From: pc-ncuc-bounces at ipjustice.org [mailto:pc-ncuc-bounces at ipjustice.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller
Sent: ???????, 19 ????????? 2011 4:12 ??
To: 'William Drake'
Cc: pc-ncuc at ipjustice.org
Subject: Re: [Pc-ncuc] letter to the Board regarding travel allocations

> Sorry for questioning your always impeccable judgement about optimal 
> communication within ICANN Milton but I was given to understand that 
> the

Not helpful. Obviously you are letting your emotions guide your response to this attempt to improve things.

> complaint had to do with NCUC taking on the responsibility to 
> reallocate my funds to KK.  One sentence that says "The EC prioritizes 
> Council members for

The complaint is about a decision the NCSG EC made. We absolutely must respond as NCSG EC members. 
Think what it means for NCUC's chair - who isn't even on the EC - to respond to a complaint about how the EC allocated travel money. You couldn't do a better job of reinforcing their narrative. 

> travel support and because Council member William Drake should be able 
> to choose his/her alternate on the Council" [sic] does nothing to 
> address the complaint and wrongly states that it was an NCSG EC 
> decision.  You are

Have you seen the complaint? Again, if you want to tweak the one sentence, tweak it. But no way are we going to send a 800 word detailed paragraph. 

> utterly confusing the matter and giving them nothing to go on.  

I don't have time for this right now, so if you want to sink into this morass alone and do it your way, feel free. I'll happily back out. 


_______________________________________________
Pc-ncuc mailing list
Pc-ncuc at ipjustice.org
http://mailman.ctyme.com/listinfo/pc-ncuc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: NCUC Travel Letter.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 17315 bytes
Desc: NCUC Travel Letter.docx
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ec-ncuc/attachments/20111019/5d735105/attachment-0001.docx>