[NCUC-EC] NCUC travel funding policy

Wed Sep 17 15:50:45 CEST 2014

Dear Bill and Milton,

I agree with you 100%, but sadly the good “potential” recipients will pay for the bad ones and then this new idea may lose its intended purpose.
I suppose that if we still can help some, that is better than nothing.

Bill and Milton, I will support your final decision.

Roy

From: Milton Mueller [mailto:mueller.syr.edu at gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 8:42 AM
To: William Drake
Cc: Balleste, Roy; Exec. Comm; Milton L Mueller
Subject: Re: [NCUC-EC] NCUC travel funding policy

We have one bad experience in which somebody in fact did receive the money upfront never showed up and we never got it back.

Since then no one has really asked to get money upfront and I would generally discourage the practice.

If we had more labor resources a better option would be to buy the ticket for them but that gets tricky with issues related to passport number, visas and all of that. You really need a bit of a bureaucracy and people with time to do these things before that's a viable

Milton L Mueller
Professor, Syracuse School of Information Studies

On Sep 17, 2014, at 3:27, William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com<mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com>> wrote:
It would be good to hear from our Treasurer who has to deal with the wire transfers.  My suggestion was based on what we do now, and always have, which I took to be easier for him.  And there is the unanswered question of, what if we give someone $2,000 up front and they end up not coming?  Who’s going to negotiate its return to our coffers?

Bill

On Sep 16, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Balleste, Roy <rballeste at stu.edu<mailto:rballeste at stu.edu>> wrote:

BTW, I am concerned this is getting a bit complicated.  I do not agree with payment after the fact. As Stefania noted, “some people upfronting the money might be a problem.”  I say not might, but it will.  If this exercise is to increase attendance of the NCUC membership, then it has to be prepaid.  Otherwise, it will lack results.  Regarding the amount, I suggest pick a fair amount, and keep it simple.  My two cents.

Roy

From: ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org<mailto:ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> [mailto:ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] On Behalf Of Balleste, Roy
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 10:07 AM
To: William Drake; Exec. Comm
Subject: Re: [NCUC-EC] NCUC travel funding policy

Hello.

I agree with the proposal.  Bill, I would say that writing a brief report after would suffice.

Kind Regards,

Roy

From: ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org<mailto:ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> [mailto:ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org] On Behalf Of William Drake
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 3:49 AM
To: Exec. Comm
Subject: [NCUC-EC] NCUC travel funding policy

Hi

So four of us (Stefi, Pranesh, Carlos, myself) met in Istanbul and had a meeting.  Having quorum, we decided to go forward with a publicly stated travel policy, which is described in Stefi’s draft below (thanks for writing it up!).  Grace and Roy it would be good to hear whether you agree with the proposal, in which case we can present it to members as a unanimous decision.

We might want to do some little language tweaks, but that’s just copy editorial.  The one substantive question I have is regarding the reporting. Stefi, you have us agreeing that funded travelers would write blogs both before and after the relevant meeting; I only recall us discussing the after.  I’m not necessarily opposed, but don’t want it to seem onerous.  Do people agree with this requirement?    If we want to proceed like this, to be clear, we’d be saying that the person would write a couple para saying there’s such and such issue happening, I’m involved in it in this way, and here’s what I expect to be debated at the meeting, and then the after post would say “as I blogged previously blah blah” and here’s what happened at the meeting and what comes next?  Is this potentially a bit redundant, in which case one blog post hoc might suffice and seem less like we’re giving them busy work?

Best,

Bill

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Milan, Stefania" <Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu<mailto:Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu>>
Subject: travel policy
Date: September 15, 2014 at 5:54:04 PM GMT+2
To: Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org<mailto:pranesh at cis-india.org>>
Cc: William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch<mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>>

Dear Pranesh
Here go my draft travel policy proposal.
I am cc-ing Bill in the interest of time. We have to decide 1) whether to fund someone for LA or not, given the meeting is a month away; 2) if so, who the contact person will be; 3) the deadline.
My two cents.
Will be online later tonight, Stefania

At the NCUC Executive Council meeting on September 5th, 2014, the EC has decided that to allocate USD 4,000 per ICANN meeting in order to financially support the in-person attendance of a selected number of NCUC members, on a call for proposals-basis.

Starting with the 2015 ICANN meetings, the EC will circulate three months before the meeting a call for proposals.
The criteria for selection are as follows:

  *   NCUC will support active members in good standing,
  *   who are actively engaged in NCUC work, for example GNSO committees or ICANN Working Groups
  *   and whose in-person attendance at a certain ICANN meeting is required in order to bring forward the NCUC values
  *   No member will be funded 2 times in a row, unless exceptional circumstances occur.
Application have to be submitted to the EC. The decision of whom to fund is at discretion of the EC, and cannot be appealed.

Each grantee will receive a lump sum up to USD 2,000.
Grantees in turn will be expected to

  *   write a blog post prior to the trip, to be published in the NCUC website, detailing their engagement and the current status of the issues under discussion
  *   write a brief report after the trip, with updates on the issue at hand.
This policy will be posted on the NCUC website under "governance" ("travel policy"). A dedicated email account will be made available in due time.

The EC has also decided to pilot the above scheme in occasion of forthcoming ICANN 51  meeting in Los Angeles (ICANN 51), allocating 2,000 dollars for the purpose. Applications containing 1) name, 2) committee or WGs you participate in, 3) up to 300 words of detailed explanation of why your presence is needed should be sent to BILL?

----------------------
Stefania Milan, PhD
Data J Lab || Tilburg University, the Netherlands || http://datajlab.nl<http://datajlab.nl/> ||
The Citizen Lab || Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto || http://citizenlab.org<http://citizenlab.org/> ||
European University Institute || www.protestsurvey.eu/<http://www.protestsurvey.eu/> ||
Center for Media and Communication Studies, Central European University || www.cmcs.ceu.hu<http://www.cmcs.ceu.hu/> ||
International Association for Media and Communication Research - International Council member and Co-Chair, Communication Policy Task Force || www.iamcr.org<http://www.iamcr.org/> ||
Executive Committee, Non-Commercial User Constituency, ICANN
mobile: [31] 62 7875 425 (NL) || [1] 647 - 973 - 6533 (CA) || [+39] 333 - 2309945 (I)
http://stefaniamilan.net/

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20140917/4222ff52/attachment.html>