[NCUC-EC] BA Travel

[William Drake]

Hi

Well again, as has been suggested to me by several vets privately, one thing we should not lose track of is the number one rule that support should go to people who are actively engaged in processes that will be taken on frontally at the meeting.  So to me that suggests priority for those involved in the bylaws rewrite.   And do bear in mind, NCUC never had a policy of supporting EC members either via the 3 ICANN slots (new from last year) or internal resources.  So we can't do this on the basis of gee, it'd be great if the gang was all there.  Of course it would.  But there is zero presumption that being on the EC means travel to any particular meeting.

My groggy minded premise is simple.  If they are going to take the lead on catalyzing the bylaws process, Tapani and Ed must be there, because that is our number one activity for the meeting, it will be demanding, and they've expressed willingness to lead us home.

If we want to split a piece of NCUC's funds out as reasonable flat rate grants to the others that's ok but they really do have to be creative and make it work.

When I mentioned institutions, I meant Carlos, Milton, and I believed CONAC staff seem to get covered via other sources.  Apparently I was mistaken on CONAC.

Now, if we are all fully committed to making this happen, then as I say I will write to Glen and ask for a room and any other ad hoc support they may be able to provide.  Imagine say 10-15 people come a day early to do this; if ICANN won't cover it, we should be prepared to put up a couple thousand for the extra hotel night.  Which of course leaves less for larger-scale discretionary travel.

I hope this makes sense? If so I write to Glen, Rob, et al.

Bill




On Aug 8, 2013, at 11:36 AM, Edward Morris <edward.morris at ALUMNI.USC.EDU> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 
> 
> Ed will get there cheaper, UK has much cheaper connections to almost
> anywhere than Finland, though maybe not by much (perhaps $200 or so).
> I would need roughly EUR 1000 =~ US$1350 for travel and about $600
> for hotel (happy to stay in a 3-star one), plus possible per diem.
> 
> But I can also get there cheaper than either Zuan or Wilson,
> by a significant amount, so if either of them needs funding,
> they should get the ICANN slots instead.
> 
> 
> I'm in general agreement with this. European travel to Buenos Aires will be cheaper than African or Asian travel.
> 
> The UK tends to be cheaper than Finland, although departure cities and times tend to play a role. Nothing we can't work around. Timing of reimbursement may also be an issue but nothing we can't work with Milton on.
> 
> In terms of cost, from least to most expensive, it would be: 1. Ed, 2. Tapani, 3. Zuan, 4. Wilson. Bill is actually cheapest but our Chair should be an ICANN funded position. 
> 
>  
> 
> > I favor paying per diem to NCUC's covered traveler as per Durban,
> > there's no reason accepting this arrangement should disadvantage
> > someone.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> 
> That appears to be settled. 
> 
> Tapani, ye expert on e-mail Meetings, should we be doing something formally on these decisions?
> 
> 
>  
> > As to making a fixed amount available per Milton, for the AGM up to
> > $5k seems ok.
> 
> That should be enough for two (from Europe at least), so assuming
> Carlos doesn't need funding, we can have ICANN pay for you, Zuan and
> Wilson and NCUC for me and Ed. If either Wilson or Zuan can arrange
> their own funding we'd only need to cover one (Ed) by NCUC money;
> if both of them can, we don't need to use NCUC money at all.
> 
> 
> NIce summary.
> 
> 
> Ed
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-ec mailing list
> Ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130809/cdf92a51/attachment.html>