[NCUC-EC] FW: Proposal for travel support for trip to the INternational working group on data protection in telecommunications in Oslo April 2016

Fri Feb 12 02:17:11 CET 2016

Hi Rafik,

OK, I now kind of understand. I don't disagree,   but I  still think
Milton's suggestions to ask her for  [a report to the EC about new
membership possibilities or opportunities/strategies for increasing our
policy influence on this issue within ICANN] should be followed. More in
spirit of transparency, I  think we should:

inform our members about such opportunities ( that there is a limited
budget for such requests)

announce that Stephanie has received such travel support and the conference
she is going to .

Best

Farzaneh

On 12 February 2016 at 02:01, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Farzaneh,
>
>
> this request is not an for outreach to get new members  but to bring
> privacy experts and Data Protection Authority to get involved in the
> process and even intervene since they have the legitimacy to do so. NCUC
> had one success in term of lobbying when our outreach and contacts get the
> EU Article29 WG to send the letter to the board in 2013 about the RAA
> provisions (the board still trying to dodge and not responding clearly to
> that letter)
>
> Stephanie is going to that meeting to inform DPA about what is happening,
> since we have newly started RDS process and we need all possible allies to
> come. so the purpose fall under "opportunities/strategies for increasing
> our policy influence on this issue within ICANN". we will follow-up with
> her closely to make this effective and beneficial for NCUC.
>
> the allocation will come from NCUC budget , we exceptionally allocate
> small amount when it is worthy to do so. that is why we need to work more
> in term of fund-seeking and explore possible areas for that.
>
> yes, in general we have the expectation that those supported by CROPP for
> example to mention NCUC, get contacts and do a serious outreach. we are not
> funding people to their own stuff, we don't have such luxury. that is quite
> clear.
>
> with comments I see in different discussions and threads with some level
> of confusion, I do see the need for a clear strategy, roadmap ,strategy
> listing goals and objectives so we can align them with the action we are
> doing. for example "influencing PDP regarding privacy" can be translated
>  into actions like capacity building for newcomers to get involved in the
> process, funding NC experts to attend meeting, producing a position paper
> about whois issue, outreach to DPA and other related parties. I will be
> happy to work on that.
>
> Such roadmap will also help us in term of selections, travel awarding,
> appointments but also expectations from of what we are doing.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2016-02-12 4:22 GMT+09:00 farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Which budget are we going to use to allocate funding to Stephanie?  I
>> agree with Rafik that it should be outcome oriented. As well as a blogpost
>> as Milton suggested I think a report to"the EC about new membership
>> possibilities" or "opportunities/strategies for increasing our policy
>> influence on this issue within ICANN", would be nice. But I would like to
>> see a plan from Stephanie on how she is going to raise awareness about our
>> work and who she potentially has in mind to approach and discuss NCUC with.
>>
>> Sometimes participants ( and I dont mean Stephanie in specific here) just
>> go to conferences with no mention of NCUC - I think if they are funded by
>> us they have an obligation to at least talk about NCUC  and our work and
>> show us results. ( whatever that maybe)
>>
>> If this is not funding that requires her to do outreach for NCUC, then
>> what is the objective of funding her travel?
>>
>> I also am skeptical about the effectiveness of participation at the same
>> conference every year which most of the times has the same group of
>> participants . I also don't know what the objective is ....
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11 February 2016 at 19:55, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Back to this, is there any objection to this decision: 600$ to attend
>>> privacy conference.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Rafik
>>> On Jan 19, 2016 10:43 AM, "PeterGreen" <seekcommunications at hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Rafik, Milton, EC members,
>>>>
>>>> I recall that it was in last April that Stephanie attened the same
>>>> meeting which was held in Seoul. So it would make it a consecutive and
>>>> productive conduct to attend this year's meeting.
>>>> I support to alloate $600 for Stephanie.
>>>> Thanks very much.
>>>> Best
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com
>>>> Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:13:48 +0900
>>>> To: milton at gatech.edu
>>>> Subject: Re: [NCUC-EC] FW: Proposal for travel support for trip to the
>>>> INternational working group on data protection in telecommunications in
>>>> Oslo April 2016
>>>> CC: ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>
>>>> Hi Milton,
>>>>
>>>> thanks for this.
>>>> yes I do agree that we can agree with giving the support here with
>>>> conditions. we have to be strategical about the support and be
>>>> outcome-oriented. I think that the approach we discussed in our EC call
>>>> (including CROPP slots)
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Rafik
>>>>
>>>> 2016-01-18 4:34 GMT+09:00 Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>:
>>>>
>>>> FYI.
>>>>
>>>> To me, this seems like a very cost-effective support. $600 for a high
>>>> profile at an international meeting among data protection commissioners. We
>>>> can attach certain conditions to Stephanie's support, such as a blog post
>>>> or a report to the EC about new membership possibilities or
>>>> opportunities/strategies for increasing our policy influence on this issue
>>>> within ICANN.
>>>>
>>>> --MM
>>>>
>>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>>> > From: Stephanie Perrin [mailto:stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca]
>>>> > Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2016 5:44 PM
>>>> > To: rafik.dammak.ncsg at gmail.com; Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu
>>>> >
>>>> > Subject: Proposal for travel support for trip to the INternational
>>>> working
>>>> > group on data protection in telecommunications in Oslo April 2016
>>>> >
>>>> > Dear Executive Committee,
>>>> > This is a proposal/request for travel support to attend the meeting
>>>> of the
>>>> > IWGDPT (aka the Berlin group) in Oslo, April 24-26 2016.  I have been
>>>> asked
>>>> > by the secretariat to write a paper for them on ICANN and privacy,
>>>> and I of
>>>> > course am delighted to do so.  I proposed to them the same deal that
>>>> we
>>>> > were able to arrange to cover my travel to Korea last April, and they
>>>> have
>>>> > agreed to cover my airfare, tentatively priced at around $860
>>>> Canadian.  If
>>>> > NCUC could cover my hotel, namely 3-4 nights at the conference hotel,
>>>> I will
>>>> > be able to attend.  Total costs should be around 588. for the hotel,
>>>> so once
>>>> > again NCUC got the lesser of the two expenses.
>>>> >
>>>> > I attach the invitation letter with details of the meeting, and the
>>>> registration
>>>> > information for the hotel.  Since they have negotiated a special rate
>>>> of 1295
>>>> > Krone or $146.72 US , and Oslo is notoriously expensive, I would
>>>> propose to
>>>> > stay at that hotel where I can also lobby folks if the occasion
>>>> arises.
>>>> >
>>>> > Kind regards Stephanie Perrin
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCUC-EC mailing list
>>> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Farzaneh
>>
>
>

-- 
Farzaneh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20160212/3389c757/attachment.html>