[NCUC-EC] Fwd: Buenos Aires, Argentina Supported Travel

[Edward Morris]

Hi


> 3. I see no reason Constituency supported travelers need to stay in 5*
> > hotels. I've done a brief search on some commercial booking sites and
> there
> > are several decent quality, 3* hotels within a half mile of the meeting
> > venue. These hotels sell for no more than USD 75 per night. An 8 night
> stay
> > prices these hotels, at most, at $600 for the Meeting.
>
> Yes, or even cheaper.
>


No question.

I was perfectly happy in Beijng in my one star USD 13 a night hotel I moved
to after the Meeting.

I would have been content staying there for my entire stay.



>
> Which suggests it'd be better for us  to have ICANN pay for people
> from Asia or Africa and use NCUC funds for people from closer by.
>


Agreed.


>
> > The per diem has yet to be established.
>
> I would be willing to forego per diem completely, but it would
> be good to have consistent rules there as well.
>


I'm of two minds about this. Per diems for volunteers are almost
contradictory. Yet there is a principle of equity involved, whereby if
ICANN supported travelers are to receive per diems I'd like not to
discriminate against Constituency supported travelers, particularly with
items like ground transportation which are expenses one would not normally
incur in the absence of a meeting.




>
> > I think it would be reasonable to assume we could, if it makes sense,
> using
> > the guidelines Milton set,  provide full support to 2-3 additional
> > participants should there be cause to do so.
>
> Yes. Two easily, three would be tight but possible, depending on
> where they'd be flying from and whether we'd be paying per diem.
>

Agreed.

>
>
>
> > What will be 'on the table' in Buenos Aires? I intend to be highly
> active,
> > as many in the EC, on the Bylaws rewrite.
>
> Likewise, even if I'm not a lawyer. But I think there's a need for
> non-lawyers, too, for they should be not merely legally tight but
> also workable in practice for non-lawyers.
>


I totally agree. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. We all bring different
and equally valuable skill sets to the exercise: I was merely offering a
hypothetical case supporting my so called candidacy for travel support.
Frankly, as I wrote, I'm not sure I even support myself or know how to
properly evaluate any claim I might have against the agreed support
criteria, or indeed, how to properly and honestly evaluate the claim of
anyone else.


Ed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130806/ac7d7722/attachment.html>