[NCUC-EC] [PC-NCSG] NCPH Intersessional Planning - Draft Agenda Version 3, 8 December

[William Drake]

Hi

> On Dec 9, 2014, at 3:03 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> hi everyone,
> 
> here the latest version of the draft agenda for NCPH meeting.
> please review it and suggest one topic for plenary session #3. btw we will have co-chairs for each session.
> we will have a NCSG session and we can use that as a strategical planning for 2015 (issues mapping, prioritization etc). we should also start thinking about the session we will have with Fadi and what topics we want to discuss with him.

Rob’s trying to accommodate CSG by squeezing mercilessly, don’t know if it works to do accountability and GNSO review both in session 1.  But interesting to see he’s added "Discussion of possible pre-ICANN 53 meeting conference.” to the next session, so in lieu of a direct response I gather that applying for the funding is possible.

Just by way of background since I’ve not mentioned to others, below is the suggestion I made.  CSG so far supports, just need to hear from IPC today.

Bill

———————



> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com>
> Subject: NCPH conference in BA?
> Date: December 7, 2014 at 11:37:31 AM GMT+1
> Cc: David Olive <david.olive at icann.org>, Glen de Saint Géry <Glen at icann.org>
> To: Robert Hoggarth <robert.hoggarth at icann.org>, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>, Elisa Cooper <Elisa.Cooper at markmonitor.com>, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com>, "Metalitz, Steven" <met at msk.com>, Tony Holmes <tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>, "rudi.vansnick at isoc.be" <rudi.vansnick at isoc.be>, "lori.schulman at ascd.org" <lori.schulman at ascd.org>, "Rosette, Kristina" <krosette at cov.com>, Benedetta Rossi <benedetta.rossi at icann.org>, Carlos Reyes <carlos.reyes at icann.org>, Stefania Milan <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>
> 
> Hi
> 
> Over morning coffee a random out of the box idea has floated through my head.  I would have sent this to the utterly under-utilized gnso-ncph-leadership at icann.org <mailto:gnso-ncph-leadership at icann.org> list but I’m not sure who is subscribed there at this point; for some strange reason, only the sysadmin can see the subscriber list.  I see in my saved messages that Glen sent a message 28 February listing subscribers at that time and it seems to be populated more by last year’s Councilors than chairs and VCs.  So I’m redeploying the DC planning Cc (and re-adding Stefi Milan, who it seems was being left off a number of recent messages, and David and Glen FTI).
> 
> So: just a thought.  The FY15 budget allocation includes $33,300 for Pre-public Meeting Seminars.  This is described by staff as follows:
> 
> These types of efforts have proven to be quite useful and popular to the community in  the past. One "conference" slot and room support available for an ICANN community to  host a pre-Public Meeting policy conference before each ICANN Public Meeting in FY15.  To be developed by ICANN staff based on previous NCUC (San Francisco and Singapore)  model. To the extent demand exceeds supply, conference slots will be initially selected by  lottery and rotated among community groups as appropriate.
> 
> (I don’t know why NCUC’s day-long Toronto conference didn’t get a mention too, but whatever).  
> 
> To my knowledge at least, nobody has applied for these funds. It would be a pity to let them go to waste, which presumably would make it harder to justify including such an allocation in future budgets.  And there is certainly a lot to talk about of interest to the community.  NCUC’s Singapore meeting on NETmundial preparations played to a packed house from beginning to end, and the prior ones were pretty full too.
> 
> It would be relatively easy (if massively time consuming) for me to organize another NCUC-led meeting, but staff’s idea here was spread the engagement.  So I’m wondering: what about submitting a proposal for a NCPH-led conference in Buenos Aires?  It could be, in effect, on ICANN Beyond the DNS Industry—concerns of commercial and noncommercial users in the context of new gTLDs, the changing internal composition of the community, etc.  It could e.g. mix a couple panel sessions with a couple structured open dialogue sessions.  Each could be jointly planned and personned, or alternatively the program could be divided and the respective groups organize sessions of particular interest to them.  Lots of configurations possible, any of which could have the positive externality of enhancing communication and collaboration amongst our tribes as well.
> 
> Is this a crazy idea I should abandon forthwith, or something we might like to think about, including with respect to the DC meeting?
> 
> Best
> 
> Bill
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20141209/d74c1b59/attachment.html>