[NCUC-EC] NCUC IGF Workshop Proposals

Sun Apr 6 10:58:00 CEST 2014

Hi

Thanks Grace for your response.  Good to hear you plan to be at IGF.  Could we list you as a Remote Moderator on one of the panels?  And someone else for the other…?

Actually I would suggest that we have 2 different people submit one proposal each, as this year’s MAG has some members who are quite adamant that there shouldn’t be multiple workshops by the same proponents (as well as that MAG members can’t submit).  I have supported the former view myself, but it’s an order of magnitude issue.  Last year a few orgs submitted 10-18 (!) proposals each and some individuals like a half dozen.  I and others advocated no more than 3 per, which is now the rule.  But while NCUC submitting 2 is perfectly legal, any multiple submissions from the same person will attract certain member's close inspection, so best not to be ‘an issue.’

So we need 2 people who are registered on the IGF website and can fill out the form, which has grown rather elaborate http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/submit-a-proposal.  And problematic in some ways, e.g. I had to call Chengetai to point out that the new requirement that proponents’ indicate their country made no sense for virtual civil society groups like NCUC, the IGC, Best Bits, etc.  He will tweak.  Anyway, I can conspire with submitters on the form requirements; if perhaps you and Pranesh could each do one that would be great.

What would also be helpful is organizational co-sponsorships.  These are important for the MAG, especially if they’re based in developing countries.  If anyone’s home org could lend it’s name in support of NCUC that’d be great.

I’ve made a decent start on the two in terms of line-ups.  For ICANN Globalization & the Affirmation of Commitments we have Fiona, Vint, and Anriette, for The Global Clearing House Function we have Wolfgang and Tarek—all of whom have been involved, mostly centrally, in the respective discussions.  I’m out of town for 5 days as of 2 hours from now but will work on them in the hotel and finalize with texts and all the rest, hopefully by Friday-Saturday.  Again, the deadline for submission is Tuesday 15th.  I also have to write reports to the secretariat on our 3 workshops last year or we’ll be ineligible for consideration in the first place, sigh…and the forms for these have grown rather detailed, sometimes absurdly, e.g. I’m supposed to know how many people in the room were from which regions and stakeholder groups and were left-handed etc.

If anyone wants to conspire this stuff or has suggestions please let me know.

Best,

Bill

On Apr 6, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Grace Githaiga <ggithaiga at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Bill
> I am hoping to attend the IGF. I am hoping to get funding. 
> 
> With regards to submitting, I do remember during our EC meeting, we had suggested that Pranesh submits? Iam I correct Pranesh? However, I see no problem if the task is just to copy and paste. Anyone of us can do it. But let Pranesh confirm first.
> 
> I will be available to do the remote participation.
> 
> Rgds
> G
> 
> From: wjdrake at gmail.com
> Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 10:19:08 +0200
> To: ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
> Subject: [NCUC-EC] NCUC IGF Workshop Proposals
> 
> Hi
> 
> IGF workshop proposals are due 15 April.  Last year I did 3, this year I’m going to propose 2, one on globalization and the AOC, the other on the clearing house function.  I can do them as UZH sponsored or as NCUC sponsored, but prefer the latter as this would open the door to a couple travel slots if my budget request to ICANN goes through (and if Rafik’s proposal for NCSG goes through, there’ll be one more).  I’m on a short time line and so need quick feedback from EC members:
> 
> 1.  Which of you are planning to go to Istanbul?  Would your attendance be dependent on getting ICANN travel support, or would you have some other support to get there anyway if no support available?
> 
> 2.  Who has already or would be willing to set up (takes a minute) an account on the (new and pretty screwed up thus far) IGF website and make the submissions?  The MAG adopted this dumb rule this year that MAG members cannot submit, so I can’t submit what I organize and will need help, one for each panel. It’s not hard, I can draft the texts and assemble the speakers (with any inputs if you like), so it’d just be a matter of cutting and pasting stuff into the fields on the secretariat’s online form.  If no interest here I will ask a regular member.
> 
> 3.  To get a high rating in the MAG’s review the proposals will have to be very multistakeholder and geo/gender diverse, which means (as with the NCUC conference) I can't submit something with multiple civil society people—at best, the moderator and one of the 4-5 speakers.  On both topics I have CS folks in mind who happen to be centrally engaged in the debates on the topics, but we will also need Remote Moderators and there it’d be easy to add someone if anyone here is interested.
> 
> 4.  That I’m organizing these two and prefer to brand them as NCUC-organized given the budget request of course doesn’t preclude anyone of you from proposing another if you want to organize, shape, speak at something.  There’s a limit of three submissions per organization now, so it would be possible to brand a third panel as NCUC rather than your home institution.  However, given that some members of the current MAG have their nose in a snit about organizations submitting multiple (and I know of a certain CSG MAG member who was annoyed we had 3 last year), it is possible that 3 will invite negative reactions and conspiring on low ratings in certain circles.  Just a wild card risk to be aware of, don’t know if it will play out.  Ad if proposals are strong they normally could survive any Machiavellian stuff on the part of a few.
> 
> So: I would greatly appreciate responses ASAP to the above, particularly on who would be willing to submit for me and, if interested, serve as remote moderator if they’re approved.
> 
> And any other thoughts?
> 
> Look forward to hearing from you,
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> On Mar 4, 2014, at 7:29 PM, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi folks
> 
> I’m just back in Geneva after an exceptionally dense period and am looking at my to do lists. I note that Fast Track budget requests for FY 15 are conveniently due this Friday 7 March.  https://community.icann.org/display/projfinadhocws/FY15+Special+Budget+Process    
> 
> As mentioned previously (below), last year I submitted two of these, for print materials and IGF travel.  The print material allocation we’ve not used much of, just the brochures Milton and I wrote and now (hopefully) the conference program.  I don’t see the point of asking again for stuff we didn’t manage to expend last time, and doubt they’d green light it.
> 
> IGF is different, and I’d think we have a good shot here.  Last time I did one for the chairs of NCSG, NCUC, and NPOC to do a NCSG-led/NCUC-cosponsored workshop, plus a supplemental to get a slot for one more NCUCer (turned out to be Avri) to speak in a  NCUC-led workshop (I also submitted to the MAG a third, universityZurich-led/NCUC-cosponsored workshop…all were approved and went well).
> 
> Two things are different this year:
> 
> 1) I at least feel less compelled to write proposals to get NPOC travel funding in light of the experienced response.
> 
> 2) The new MAG is likely to put in place a rule that MAG members cannot submit workshop proposals, although their institutions can.  I think it’s daft, but some people seem to think it addresses some sort of conflict of interest problem (in the past we just didn’t rate our own proposals, but apparently if our names’ are on proposals the whole system is corrupt…even though numerous MAG members had workshop proposals turned down).
> 
> Which means:
> 
> a) I can work on a budget submission and workshop proposal to the MAG, but someone else will have to set up an account on the IGF site and submit the proposal for NCUC when the time comes.  Actually, for MAG insurance purposes, it might not be a bad idea to submit two proposals, perhaps with different multistakeholder sponsors.
> 
> b) If NCSG wants to have a workshop again, I can help but will not write or submit the proposal, and Rafik can decide who he wants to involve in what capacity.
> 
> So in the next couple days, NCUC needs to submit something.  The rationale being outreach, normally the chair should be one of the slots (and if we want to be consistent with what other constituencies and RALOs etc. usually submit) we can ask for one other slot.  To run a workshop, it’s hard to say we need three people.  On the other hand, if we submit two proposals, then maybe we can get away with asking for a third slot.
> 
> I have several ideas about ICANN-related outreachy workshop topics, e.g. globalization of the AoC, the role of the GAC from a CS perspective, etc.  Don’t need fully formed WS proposals to submit budget requests.
> 
> Please have a look at the URL above at the budget request form and and let me know if you’d like to help out with this in the next couple days.  Any ideas on topics or other aspects most welcome of course. If you have additional ideas for things we could ask for, I’m open minded…I note that so far the only GNSO submission is the registries asking for four (!) extra travel slots for ICANN meetings.  Makes me wonder if we shouldn’t ask for one, although Finance has routinely turned these down as a matter of policy…
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ NCUC-EC mailing list NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec

***********************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
  University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
  ICANN, www.ncuc.org
william.drake at uzh.ch (direct), wjdrake at gmail.com (lists),
  www.williamdrake.org
***********************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20140406/48cd651b/attachment.html>