[NCUC-EC] NCUC Procedures Rules EC Comment Period

[Renata Aquino Ribeiro]

😞
Won't make it to both, I think. Sorry
But will try

Em 12/04/2017 16:16, "farzaneh badii" <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> escreveu:

> ​Anna meant Thursday. It will be on Thursday ​at 16.00. Our bylaws meeting
> will be on Friday.
>
> Farzaneh
>
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Apologies, won't make it on Fri
>>
>> May have limited email access
>>
>> Em 12/04/2017 16:07, "hfaiedh ines" <hfaiedh.ines2 at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>
>>> Friday should be fine for me. I have added my comments to the document
>>> too.
>>>
>>> 2017-04-11 21:25 GMT-04:00 Anna Loup <loupac5556 at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> The call is going to be at 16.00 this Friday. I will email Maryam to
>>>> schedule to call for the EC.
>>>>
>>>> Anna Loup
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <
>>>> raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all
>>>>>
>>>>> Answers inline
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:58 PM, farzaneh badii
>>>>> <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Farzaneh
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <
>>>>> raquino at gmail.com>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Hi
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thank you for this comprehensive document.
>>>>> >> I've answered the poll and commented on the doc.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I am confused about the outreach session.
>>>>> >> Procedures demand a list of things from the proposer but I haven't
>>>>> >> seen dedicated budget for outreach.
>>>>> >> How can we demand from the proposer a list of requirements if no
>>>>> >> budget or association with NCUC is present?
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Since I completed the outreach part and specifically mentioned not to
>>>>> > allocate special budget to general outreach, I will explain.
>>>>>
>>>>> Btw says Farrell Folly all over the doc in huge letters
>>>>> Although I understand the contributors are to be acknowledged, perhaps
>>>>> this would be better as a last part of the document  (credits)
>>>>> As it is a collective work, though, of course the group knows best
>>>>>
>>>>> > As I said
>>>>> > before, it is not a great idea to allocate a set budget to outreach
>>>>> > activities because sometimes we get many good requests that we might
>>>>> want to
>>>>> > fund and sometimes we don't get many. Having a set budget can
>>>>> prevent EC to
>>>>> > approve things for the best interest of the constituency. What is
>>>>> important
>>>>> > for EC to consider is regional diversity and the benefit of the
>>>>> outreach
>>>>> > event. It should be assessed whether the person has received funding
>>>>> before,
>>>>> > whether the event they are going to do outreach has the type of
>>>>> audience
>>>>> > that could be potentially NCUC members, if the outreach plan is
>>>>> detailed and
>>>>> > whether the outreach requester is an active member.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree w/ all this.
>>>>> this better detailment is what takes me to the next point - if someone
>>>>> doesn't detail (previous or after outreach) what should EC do?
>>>>> will get back to this
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > I dont understand your question on how can we demand a list of
>>>>> requirements
>>>>> > when there is no budget or association.
>>>>>
>>>>> some outreach are just about a member requesting a speaker or printed
>>>>> material - should they follow the same process?
>>>>>
>>>>> > It is very clear that we consider
>>>>> > such requests and if EC decides, it can give the funding to the
>>>>> requestor.
>>>>> > But what we don't have is a budget allocated specifically to
>>>>> outreach for
>>>>> > each year. of course if all EC members want to have a specific
>>>>> budget and
>>>>> > have a detailed outreach policy like that of the travel support,
>>>>> then we can
>>>>> > do that. I just pointed out that by allocating a strict budget to
>>>>> outreach
>>>>> > you might limit effective outreach activities. For example, if  we
>>>>> need 4000
>>>>> > USD for the outreach Africa event this year and we decide to use NCUC
>>>>> > budget, and we have a budget cap of 4000 USD for outreach for the
>>>>> whole year
>>>>> > then our hands will be tight.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Moreover, while outreach is great, we also need to have events and
>>>>> > activities for in-reach and make our current members active.
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>> agree w/ all this too
>>>>>
>>>>> also think inreach is priority and could be paired w/ events for
>>>>> training in internet policymaking w/ veterans
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Imagine if someone doesn't comply, also what could be the
>>>>> consequence?
>>>>> >> So I'd take maybe these would be good practices or recommendations
>>>>> but
>>>>> >> obligatory procedures seems a bit of a reach.
>>>>> >> However, as I followed the work of the group as EC only, I
>>>>> understand
>>>>> >> this extended reach in scope could be something the members may wish
>>>>> >> to discuss.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > If someone does not comply with the requirements and arrange events
>>>>> with our
>>>>> > affiliation, we send a note to them and tell them to inform NCUC in
>>>>> future
>>>>> > events or we will contact the event organizers and tell them that the
>>>>> > affiliation they had was wrong.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > We need a process for those who want to do NCUC outreach or use NCUC
>>>>> as
>>>>> > their affiliation when organizing a session related to NCUC mission.
>>>>> These
>>>>> > procedures address them.
>>>>> >>
>>>>>
>>>>> So getting back to this point
>>>>>
>>>>> OK if members are going to in touch w/ EC for their planning then they
>>>>> have some support to properly picture any association they want to do.
>>>>> Members have varied knowledge of NCUC and experience in planning
>>>>> events.
>>>>> I just hope some leeway is given when they are, in good will, offering
>>>>> spaces to NCUC.
>>>>> Better to educate then police people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Renata
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Best,
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Renata
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Anna Loup <loupac5556 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >> > Hello All,
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > I am sending you the link for the Procedural Rules for commenting.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b-GyV4FQdIZ8MIWiKVznSsxl
>>>>> b-_z7GQCZotf1g_wosk/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > We will also be having a meeting to go over these rules. As a way
>>>>> to
>>>>> >> > ensure
>>>>> >> > the availability of as many people as possible, please fill out
>>>>> this
>>>>> >> > Doodle
>>>>> >> > poll by Tuesday at  11:59 UTC. Apologies for the short notice/
>>>>> short
>>>>> >> > timeframe.
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > https://doodle.com/poll/ixeah9rcwtgs89tv
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Best,
>>>>> >> > Anna Loup
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> >> > 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20170412/d117d172/attachment.html>