[NCUC-EC] INPUT REQUIRED: FY18 NCPH Intersessional

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi,

not really, you can change venue but you won't get consensus which one that
satisfies most of the people. for example, those from APAC will have a long
itinerary to go any LAC located venue and likely to transit in the USA
which means needing visa.
my point is to avoid adding more meetings than we have now. We have 3 ICANN
meetings already and we need to help people to get there. adding more
meetings like intersessional is de fatco exclusive in term of visa, time
and availability.
the real work, the heavy one, the needed one is done in the real
interessesional : between ICANN meetings .

Best,

Rafik

2017-07-31 10:06 GMT+09:00 Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>:

> it's actually the contrary
>
> If people are having difficulty getting visas, you're not cancelling
> the event, you help the people - or change the venue
>
> if meetings should be cancelled because of visa issues than cancel all
> meetings, not only intersessional
>
> Even it out. No one participates on anything, only online.
>
>
> I do understand that these meetings take a toll. And weigh heavier on
> who carries the greater part of the work - like chairs.
>
> But that is yet another reason why the work must be shared.
>
> And one way of doing it is getting people ready to do work, to be at
> these meetings, to do policy.
>
> Or it will just continue to be small groups doing all the work and
> larger groups w/out access to any meeting, not doing any work.
>
> Chairs should be able to choose meetings they need to be at, work that
> is worthy that they are involved. Not doing all executive work all the
> time.
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > one effective way to reduce the problems with visa is to limit the
> number of
> > meetings. I know that may sound radical but it is still worthy to think
> > about.  I raised the concern regarding the inflation to meetings and the
> > issues related to get a visa and prepare seriously for those meetings,
> not
> > even talking about the impact on our daily life and work. the more
> meetings
> > you have, the less inclusive it is.
> >
> > we have already 3 ICANN meetings and we need to use them effectively (as
> a
> > reminder they are around 3 weeks including meetings themselves and
> > traveling, and more depending on the location). do we need 2 or 3 days
> > meetings and traveling around to know more about CSG positions? do we
> > seriously don't know CSG positions on serval topics?
> >
> > btw, not just the location but the timing of the intercessional can
> impact
> > those who need also to apply for a visa for ICANN meeting: for example
> > applying to get to US visa for Puerto Rico meeting and then going just a
> few
> > weeks before to intercessional meeting. it is basically a logistical
> > nightmare to get 2 visas within a short period, and many usually end up
> to
> > forgo one of them.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Rafik
> >
> >
> > 2017-07-31 8:13 GMT+09:00 David Cake <dave at davecake.net>:
> >>
> >>         I think if we have an intersessional, we may as well have it
> every
> >> year, but I am still feeling that the intersessional is not its most
> >> effective form. If we are to continue having one, we should think about
> ways
> >> to make it more valuable. More access to senior staff might help with
> that,
> >> make it a meeting where we are able to focus on our relationship with
> the
> >> organisation a bit more?
> >>
> >>         I very much understand the visa issues, but I am coming to feel
> >> that there is no good solution currently. I have very little desire
> >> personally to visit Trumps America, but I do see some sense in the LA
> idea.
> >> Is there anyone that we currently think we would support for attendance
> >> (e.g. an EC member, councillor, or other office holder) who would not be
> >> able to attend if it was in the USA?
> >>
> >>
> >>         David
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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/20170731/81825e69/attachment.html>