[NCUC-EC] Assessing Travel Support Requests for BA

[Balleste, Roy]

Happy Sunday my colleagues:


Thank you Bill and Stefania.  Indeed a difficult choice.  Considering the choices, and I add, the need for the human rights discussion in this critical juncture in the global debate, I support Monika.


I also support James simply out of practicality and continuity; we are going to Ireland next.


Hope these observations help.


Kindly,


Roy


________________________________
From: ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org <ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> on behalf of William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 5:03 AM
To: Exec. Comm
Subject: [NCUC-EC] Assessing Travel Support Requests for BA

Hi

So the application period has closed and now the fun begins, we have to decide among four applications.

Monika Zalnieriute (Lithuania): Was in Singapore on other money, deeply involved with the human rights effort launched after NCUC's London CD meeting with the COE + Switzerland.  See her app sent to the list 14 April.  We got her CROPP support to attend the EuroDIG meeting in Sofia in June.

Arun Sukumar (India): Attended Istanbul (we have his interview by ICANN on our website), has quickly gotten deeply engaged in the accountability process (sent a report to the list on a meeting held in Delhi) and is tracking the IANA transition too.  Was in Singapore at our CD meeting on his organization's dime.  See his app sent to the list 18 April.

James Gannon (Ireland): Attended Istanbul, has quickly gotten deeply engaged in the IANA and accountability processes, also participating in the Privacy and Proxy Accreditation WG and the IAG on WHOIS Conflicts.  See his app sent to the list 19 April.

James Njoroge Gitau (Kenya): Not previously involved much but would like to have a look and consider ways to engage, per Ben in Singapore. See his app sent to the list 20 April.

I have my own views but would rather hear what others think first.  I will however repeat Milton's comment, which people seemed to resonate with:


On Apr 19, 2015, at 9:38 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu<mailto:mueller at syr.edu>> wrote:

 the choices should be based on criteria, and those criteria should very clearly and directly serve the immediate agenda and goals of the Constituency at a particular meeting. It should NOT be based on personalities, feelings, likability, first come first served, and other extraneous things. Also, keep in mind that there is a fellowship program from the much richer ICANN that can bring in new and untested people.


So what is our most pressing need at this particular meeting?

Please recall that the guidelines that we agreed state, "The Executive Committee will assess such requests for assistance on a case-by-case basis and strive to make a decision within one week of receipt."

Conversation, please.

Bill


*********************************************************
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>
Internet Governance: The NETmundial Roadmap http://goo.gl/sRR01q
*********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20150426/55274b7c/attachment.html>