[NCUC-EC] Stephanie Perrin Travel Support + Procedures for Ad Hoc Requests

Mon Mar 30 14:14:23 CEST 2015

Hi PeterGreat you are taking this on. I believe Stefania already developed a comprehensive one and what you could do is just copy and past (with whatever amendments you think are necessary) and fit them into the bits that Bill has suggested. 
Rgds

From: seekcommunications at hotmail.com
To: ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 02:46:04 +0000
Subject: Re: [NCUC-EC] Stephanie Perrin Travel Support + Procedures for Ad Hoc Requests

Hi Folks,
For your note of Stefania's previous email, I think this is where I should start to say something.
I truly understand and agree with what Stefania has expressed.And I know that she has always been dedicated to the EC's work even though she is so busy.
So that's why I declare to take up the thread, and follow up, to make us move along.
We are a group, and I do not want to see all of the work overly burdens Bill, burdens someone. Each time when we see the discussion emails which are so long and detailed with rationales, with background information, all of those did take time and energy.
 So I want to learn and share those burdens, responsiblities. Though I am not good at drafting ,I would like to follow on what Stefania have done, to frame an integrated new Travel Support Policy.
Listen to your views anytime. Thanks.
BestPeter
From: Stefania.Milan at EUI.eu
To: william.drake at uzh.ch; ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 19:00:40 +0000
Subject: Re: [NCUC-EC] Stephanie Perrin Travel Support + Procedures for Ad	Hoc	Requests

Hi all

back from traveling with irregular email access, here go my two cents.  

I am not sure I have replied on Stephanie's request, so, again: consensus from my side.

Concerning the travel policy. I think it is crucial to have policies in place. Bill has expressed it beautifully in the email that started this thread. Personally, I think two different policies would work better than one, and make things clearer. But, as
 it should be, majority wins. So if this is our final decision, please people go ahead and create a new text. I have done my share.

A side note on process: I worked in government and one thing I learned to hate was the fact that many initiatives were started, tasks created, work done.. with no follow-up whatsoever, a clear sign of lack of planning. Disturbing.

It would have been helpful if people had expressed from the onset their preference re: a new policy or a simple add-on to the existing policy. As far as I can remember, I only heard Bill's proposal. I developed mine. I was asked to create a google doc that
 no one appears to have engaged with. The same happened with the other travel policy, developed by myself and Bill last fall. Now, things like these are 'fun' to do if they are done collectively. The EC debate shouldn't be limited to +1-style comments. Like
 all of us, I am dead busy, and stealing time from bed and leisure to volunteer for NCUC. I don't want to grow annoyed with NCUC as I did with the government.

My two cents, in peace

stefi

Da: ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org <ncuc-ec-bounces at lists.ncuc.org> per conto di GG <ggithaiga at hotmail.com>

Inviato: lunedì 23 marzo 2015 16.08

A: William Drake; Exec. Comm

Oggetto: Re: [NCUC-EC] Stephanie Perrin Travel Support + Procedures for Ad Hoc Requests

Hi Bill

I support your two proposals namely support Stephanie and include the adhoc funding text into the main travel policy doc.

Rgds

Grace

--- Original Message ---

From: "William Drake" <william.drake at uzh.ch>

Sent: 23 March 2015 07:57

To: "Exec. Comm" <ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org>

Subject: [NCUC-EC] Stephanie Perrin Travel Support + Procedures for Ad Hoc      Requests

Hello

So after some back and forth we now have a formal request  (see below) for ad hoc travel support from Stephanie to attend the data protection meeting where WHOIS will be on the agenda and to network with commissioners, which would be a very good
 thing for us.  So while it’s not technically an ICANN meeting, it will advance NCUC/SG’s objectives, and would be a missed opportunity not to do it.

Her hotel will cost $869.  I would argue we should allocate $1,000 to cover at least a little of her incidental expenses, just like we did with Ed (who is now representing us solo in Istanbul as Robin alas had a canceled flight…glad we did it!).

Please let me know if you agree with this proposal, or have another, or concerns etc.

Going forward, we should standardize and make transparent the policy for such ad hoc requests.  NCUC has always done these things in a loose and informal way, focused on getting the work done rather than building admin apparatus, but with the
 membership having grown substantially and transparency becoming important it’s good to lay this stuff out.

Stefania earlier had circulated a proposal in this regard.  She advocated a separate new policy with various provisions.  Personally, my preference would be to not make things complicated.  I would think a one paragraph addition to the existing
 travel policy starting that NCUC also can up to [four? six?] time a year and on an ad hoc basis provide up to $1,000 [and in exceptional cases of need, up to $1,500?] to members who are deeply involved in an important process and representing us to attend
 ICANN working group meetings and related events where ICANN issues will be discussed and networking would be advantageous.  We could also require them to submit verifying docs post hoc before reimbursement and to write a couple paragraphs blog post on the
 experience, just like the others, so it’d fit into the same document.  Ed and Stephanie have both indicated a willingness to do this.

So there are two different proposals on the table, it’d be helpful to have some engagement and work toward a solution we can announce at the same time as the funding of Ed and Stephanie.  Please have a look again at her proposal, consider the
 two approaches, and weigh in on this as well.

Thanks much

Bill

PS: I’ve been in touch with the folks at Public Interest Registry and they are donating $15,000.  I’ve asked Milton to provide to the EC an annual update on the status of our bank account once they’ve deposited.

Begin forwarded message:

Date: March 22, 2015 at 6:32:24 PM GMT+1

From: Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>

To: William Drake <wjdrake at gmail.com>

Subject: Fwd: Invitation to attend the Berlin group meeting and present a paper on the ICANN Privacy situation

Dear Bill, 

Further to the earlier discussions with respect to the attached invitation to present a paper on ICANN and current privacy issues at the Berlin group meeting in Seoul, Korean, I would like to request funding support from the NCUC,  The conference organizers,
 namely the Chair Alexander Dix has agreed to pay my airline ticket if another organization could fund the hote.  The meeting invitation is attached, as well as my hotel reservation at the conference hotel.  I have booked the ticket, and the amount is 2420.79
 C.  (I will be covering 200C of this myself).

The hotel costs 180,000 per night with 21% tax and gratuity.  Breakfast is an additional 20,000KRW, so four nights at the hotel (Saturday night to Tuesday night) will amount to 4 x 242,000KRW or 968,000 KRW.  This computes at $869.33 US.  There are of course
 per diem costs, and taxis/bus from airport, but two dinners and a lunch are I believe included in the host package.

I am attempting to find a partner to share the room and cut the costs in half, and if that happens will of course only ask NCUC to cover my half of the expenses.  I have gone ahead and booked the room, in order to get the discount conference rate, which is
 competitive by downtown Korean standards.  I would stay at a cheaper hotel, but the whole purpose of the visit, other than the additional opportuntity to draft a final report for the committee after the meeting, is to lobby the data protection commissioner
 community to take a further interest in ICANN and its activities.  

Kind regards, 

Stephanie Perrin

-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject: 
Invitation to attend the Berlin group meeting and present a paper on the ICANN Privacy situation

Date: 
Sat, 21 Mar 2015 17:56:57 -0400

From: 
Stephanie Perrin 
<stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>

To: 
William Drake 
<wjdrake at gmail.com>

Dear Bill and Milton,
I am writing you to request funding to cover four nights hotel in the 
conference hotel in Seoul, where the Berlin group (IWGDPT, the 
International worling group on data protection in telecommunications) 
will be holding its meeting April 26-28.  As previously discussed, they 
have offered to pay my airline ticket if someone else can cover the 
hotel, providing I am willing to present a report at the meeting and 
follow up with a written paper.  This is an excellent oppotunity to 
engage the Article 29 group of data commissioners, as well as many other 
commissioners and privacy experts who attend this meeting.  The Berlin 
group is much broader than Europe alone, and ICANN has a full item on 
the attached agenda.
The costs of the hotel with breakfast are 200 KRW a night plus taxes.  I 
am not sure what the per diem rate is for NCUC activities, but it would 
not be more than an additional $70 US per day, so my estimate of 
expenses is a total of  $869 US for the hotel with 21% taxes, and $280 
per diem.  The cost of the air ticket is 2400 so we are getting the 
bettter end of this bargain.

I have booked the ticket, and made the reservation, in order to keep 
costs down and get the discount rate.  I do hope this is acceptable to 
the executive committee.  I did not seek out a cheaper hotel, because 
the whole purpose of this trip is to engage the world data commissioners 
and their staff in this issue, a task much more easily accomplished from 
the conference hotel, especially in a place like Seoul.  Further, the 
rate that KISA has got from the Lotte hotel is very competitive with 
other hotels.
Kind regards,
Stephanie Perrin

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. 

_______________________________________________
NCUC-EC mailing list
NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec 		 	   		  

_______________________________________________
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/20150330/bf063bcf/attachment.html>