[NCUC-EC] August to do [long]

Mon Aug 12 14:52:27 CEST 2013

Hi Bill,

>
> After returning from South Africa on 23 July I had a few nights with
> fever, cold shakes, sweating, and muscle aches, but then it seemed to go
> away.    So my wife and I did a short trip during which I got massively sun
> burnt (creme useless) and developed quite a lot of red itchy sores all
> over the upper half of my body.  Plus the fever, cold shakes, sweating,
> and muscle aches are all back, including during the day.   Michiko was
> convinced I had chicken pox, but happily I'm just back from my doctor who
> says it's just severe sun poisoning, which is not contagious.  So while I'm
> going to be an enfeebled basket case for awhile, I can continue as planned
> with our vacation——I'll be in NYC 8-18th, Chicago 18th-26th, and NY again
> 26-31.  Hopefully during that time I will not have to avail myself of the
> wonderful US health system, but I will nevertheless be jammed up with
> family and friends.
>

take care, Cannes looks dangerous, the other cannes was a disaster for
romans :)

>
>
> *1. Buenos Aires Travel*
>
> I had dinner with Glen the other night and she's fully aware that the
> requests to identify covered travelers are becoming progressively more
> unrealistic.  If we can get her something in the next week that should be
> fine.  Per previous I appreciate the magnanimous offers to step back in
> favor of someone else, but would also note that we have two or three orgs
> represented on the EC that generally pay for their people to attend.  It
> would be good to have confirmation yes or no of this from the relevant
> folks.  If it is correct, then all we need to do to get the full EC there
> is cover one person out of NCUC funds, presumably the cheapest ticket.  I'd
> guess that'd be Tapani or Ed.  Could you guys please price.  I favor paying
> per diem to NCUC's covered traveler as per Durban, there's no reason
> accepting this arrangement should disadvantage someone.
>
>
yes they take names early but the constituency travel start the real
process of contacting and booking late (it is all about cost reduction)
for guidelines, we can use icann ones as reference(they put limit of ticket
cost by region, per diem changed by country) btw not all supported
participants get per diem, as nomcom member, I have to show receipts and
the process of repayment is long, I think same for ATRT and other
committees.

> is that our priority this time should be to focus on finishing what we
> started with regard to getting the house in order.  If, closer to the date,
> it appears there's a non-EC member who's doing something key that could
> make the trip with a little cash injection, of course we can take that up
> then.  But for now I propose we focus on the Big Dog in the room:
>
>
> *2.  Bylaws Revision*
>
> I know some folks are chomping at the bit to get this going and hope we
> can harness that good energy into a productive group effort.  As you know,
> we have http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bylaws, the
> subscribers of which are
>
>    - ncuc at tapani.tarvainen.info<http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/bylaws/ncuc--at--tapani.tarvainen.info>
>    - nmutungu at gmail.com<http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/bylaws/nmutungu--at--gmail.com>
>    - wilson at isoc.ug<http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/bylaws/wilson--at--isoc.ug>
>    - wjdrake at gmail.com<http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/bylaws/wjdrake--at--gmail.com>
>
> Once discussions are actually going to get going, I believe a number of
> veteran members who care about NCUC and have been involved in previous
> efforts will want to get engaged here.  We also will need to take full
> stock of the various versions that people have played with previously;
> nobody will feel good about their work being simply set aside by new folks.
>  So some sensitivity in managing this process will be called for.  In
> addition, we will need to bring into the discussion either Rob (who's got
> the institutional memory and was involved in the previous reworking) or
> Mary from staff to make sure that whatever we do fits with the NCSG
> Charter, the GNSO Operating Procedures, the ICANN Bylaws, etc.
>
> Here's my suggestion: Ed and Tapani, since you're particularly eager, how
> about being the lead carnival barkers and get people into the tent in
> August?  Some messages to ncuc-discuss, and direct appeals to key vets, to
> join the listserv (you don't have to use the word 'team' if you don't want)
> and get organized during August?
>
> Then, in September - October the group decides how it wants to proceed and
> online collaboration commences in earnest (IGF will cause asynchronous
> delays in some corners), resulting hopefully in a draft that people are
> like 90% ok with by BA.
>
> +1 looks good plan, you dont have to start from scratch, there are already
several drafts. involving icann staff will be helpful. shall we contact
 SIC (a board committee)and Ray Plazk or that will be next step?because
there will be review and negotiations even if we agree within NCUC
membership (I still have NCSG charter in mind and not always the best
memories)
for f2f, maybe if people can find time in IGF ,but I guess that will be
already packed and everybody busy with workshops etc, more worse than ICANN
meeting.

=> I can ask Glen to secure a room for us for Friday 15 November in BA to
> do an intensive last push F2F negotiation to pull it together.  I can also
> ask her, and Xavier, whether any funds can be made available to cover some
> hotels so we can be there, but this may be difficult.  In which case, and
> returning to Milton's $5k, my proposal would be that NCUC makes available
> $2-3k as needed to cover the extra night of hotel so we can get this done.
>
> +1

> Assuming good will all around, we could then have something to be vetted
> for an hour on CD, and then put to a vote along with the elected NCUC
> positions the weeks of Nov. 25 − 8 December…not too far off from our
> schedule last time.
>
>

> *3.  Programmatic*
>
> The response to the closed generic workshop and to us doing this sort of
> thing was so positive that I was severely tempted to take another whack at
> the piñata, taking advantage of Joy's last stand as a Councilor, and do a
> workshop on human rights & ICANN, what's it really mean, maybe based off a
> five page discussion paper.  I've also talked with Olga Cavalli about doing
> something together, whether within the program or off campus at a
> university.  But the more I think about it, the more I wonder if it'd be
> best to hold off on this so we can focus on getting the bylaws done.  Don't
> want to dilute people's energies too much.  Any bandwidth left over after
> bylaws can simply be applied to the GNSO issues de jour.
>
> That said, if some folks step forward and say they are really prepared to
> devote the needed bandwidth, we can reconsider.
>

I think BA is good opportunity if we avoid mistakes like Beijing i.e.
setting program in advance and avoid miscommunication . in term of cost it
shouldn't be a burden, but I guess the condition sine qua non is to have
local partners and I would like to ask for firm commitment from our
brazilian comrades to help with their neighbour,
Human rights as topic will be great, we have many people talking about DNS
industry, we are the "stewardship" of HR within ICANN.
for the workload, we can split efforts between different members so people
can focus on specific project while the chair can follow the progress and
coordinate.

> There is also the open question of whether having talked about it with the
> two vice chairs in Durban, we want to try to organize a full meeting with
> the GAC in BA.  I would only want to do this if we really really
> were organised with an agenda of questions to pursue and a strong NCUC
> contingent on the ground.  Otherwise it could wait.
>
>
>
it can be game changing,but yes we need to have specific points to discuss,
we talked before about briefing for board, fade, for GAC members who
receive a big bind of organised material, it looks mandatory .

*4.  Toward Singapore*
>
> One other reason to keep our power dry, stick to the bylaws job, etc, is
> the next cycle.  As you know I have submitted a number of budget and GNSO
> Tool Kit requests, including for a) support for a Thursday new EC retreat
> and b) a Friday policy conference in Singapore.  (I'd originally wanted to
> do London, but there's no point trying to compete with ALAC's Atlas II
> conference, especially since many of us are At Large as well).
>
> yes for non competition, we should be present at ATLAS conf to add some
point of views, unfortunately missed with at-large. I see also London,
there are several organisation like privacy international, open rights
group(where maria is board member), as guidelines, we should identify
partner and maybe thinking about different format, one day policy event,
roundtable, policy workshop etc.

Best,

Rafik

>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130812/df4e75b4/attachment.html>