[NCUC-EC] [NPOC Excom] CIVICRM Costs/Request

[Renata Aquino Ribeiro]

Sorry one word missing here

Neither we want to *deny*
NCSG EC discussion for approval is important

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:20 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro
<raquino at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Farzaneh and all
>
> Thanks for the responses.
>
> I`ll just highlight, yet again, that NCUC EC has never bypassed or
> challenged any NCSG EC decision.
>
> What happens is that NCUC EC is more involved with outreach gets to
> listen from ICANN community members about if they have applied or not,
> rejected or not, wonder about the time for applicaitons, some re-apply
> (just in our last members calll we had a doubt from someone who had a
> friend in IPC wanting to leave for NCUC)
>
> NCUC Chair and EC don't have the answer for these outlier candidates,
> these specific situations
> Neither we want to
> NCSG EC discussion for approval is important
>
> But we have information, we get questions and we need information from
> the database
>
> And yes, I also think that if it is a budget coming from the
> Constituency, the constituency should have the right to observe how
> that is progressing
>
> To be honest, this is not a consultation to NCUC EC but a search for
> legitimization of the choice made, since NCSG will move with the
> company they chose anyway
>
> Another question I have is since half of our (newfound) budget is
> gone, do we at least get access to the other half?
>
> Perhaps with it we can do an open bid and do a parallel database to
> record these cases of "members in limbo"
>
> Best,
>
> Renata
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:20 PM, Elsa S <elsa.saade at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hey all,
>>
>> Thank you all for the elaborate discussion on this thread. I can see how
>> important and urgently needed this development is, which is why i would
>> personally not be opposed to approving the budget allocation.
>>
>> It would be worthwhile though, to put down a disclaimer that we would like
>> to aim for a better system that eventually would have all aspects we want,
>> including being open source for instance. Hopefully this would happen once
>> the system is workable and once we possibly can reprioritize without as much
>> urgency. I do understand some doubts on the thread, however given the
>> circumstances, it would be imperative for us to get this going as soon as
>> possible given the importance of keeping existing data sane and keeping NCSG
>> EC’s work going smoother for the sake of our constituencies, our members and
>> obviously our growth.
>>
>> My teo cents here.
>>
>> Elsa
>> —
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 5:09 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone
>>>
>>> NPOC approved the allocation of one-off 4000.00 USD to go for improvement
>>> to CiviCRM.
>>>
>>> I thank NPOC EC for this speedy action.
>>>
>>> I was wondering if NCUC EC members could also allocate a budget equal to
>>> that of NPOC to service CIVICRM, 4000.00 USD?
>>>
>>> Also I have been in touch with ICANN, if we want to contract like previous
>>> years, we need the invoices to be paid from a bank account and be reimbursed
>>> by ICANN. I talked to ICANN today and it is the same this round as well.
>>> Previous years we used NCUC bank account to pay the costs and was
>>> reimbursed. If NCUC EC could also approve that the treasurer pays the
>>> invoices from NCUC bank account and be reimbursed, that would be great. I
>>> have asked ICANN staff for confirmation, they confirmed and the treasurer
>>> can also approach them anytime to ensure the reimbursement will happen.
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot, we need speedy action on this and I appreciate if you could
>>> weigh in soon.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Farzaneh
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 7:49 AM Raoul Plommer <plommer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I agree with Michael on this - we have a fair amount of money ready to be
>>>> allocated for this database and the service that goes with it. I'd be ready
>>>> to pay a little extra for having an open bid for these services. We should
>>>> really set an example and practice what we preach.
>>>>
>>>> I'd also be ready to give the constituency chairs read-only access to the
>>>> members database as well as the NCSG EC mailing list.
>>>>
>>>> -Raoul
>>>>
>>>> On 17 July 2018 at 09:13, Michael Karanicolas <mkaranicolas at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "You have access through your NCSG EC reps."
>>>>>
>>>>> I would be interested in hearing more opinions regarding whether
>>>>> Constituency Chairs should have access to the database. I don't feel
>>>>> strongly one way or the other, but I do see a distinction between
>>>>> having access and having the ability to formally challenge the NCSG on
>>>>> its decision-making. I don't think anybody is suggesting the latter,
>>>>> but I think it's worth considering whether using Constituency money to
>>>>> support the database should be accompanied by the Chairs getting
>>>>> observer status.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding open contracting - obviously my views on this are well known
>>>>> :) But - it can be problematic to adopt something like this midway
>>>>> through a process. If we've received estimates under the understanding
>>>>> that they will be kept confidential, it's tough to go back on that -
>>>>> an understanding which is also reflected in the WS2 recommendations.
>>>>> However, I would support any moves to formally adopt open contracting
>>>>> for future processes going forward, and would be happy to help draft a
>>>>> policy along those lines.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:03 PM, farzaneh badii
>>>>> <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > Thank you Renata.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I understand your concerns and I would like to give you a bit of a
>>>>> > background. Answers in line
>>>>> > Farzaneh
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 11:24 AM Renata Aquino Ribeiro
>>>>> > <raquino at gmail.com>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Hi Michael and all
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> This is news to me now as well so I will ask more information from
>>>>> >> ICANN
>>>>> >> staff.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> NCUC EC had its call today and I will repeat my thoughts on this
>>>>> >> issue.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> This feels too much like a "shotgun wedding".
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> NCSG Chair wants our response by the end of the week.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> However, I think we should discuss with our members if want to commit
>>>>> >> half of our (newfound) budget on a database we have no access to and
>>>>> >> know the issues of (I have accompanied a few meetings at NCSG Chair's
>>>>> >> invite but I think I saw only the tip of the iceberg).
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > You have access through your NCSG EC reps.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> There is no guarantee that building a relationship with this company
>>>>> >> will end the issues being faced now on membership approval front.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Renata, I have been working with a faulty system since January. But
>>>>> > Maryam
>>>>> > and I persisted with the developer to make the data base work and make
>>>>> > the
>>>>> > commenting process work. So it was functioning until a couple of weeks
>>>>> > ago
>>>>> > when it started not saving again and our contract with that developer
>>>>> > which
>>>>> > was done during Tapani has now ended. CIVICRM needs to be maintained
>>>>> > on
>>>>> > monthly basis  otherwise we will lose data.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Approval front, I still say, transparency, sure, rejection reasons can
>>>>> > be
>>>>> > sent to you without the sensitive data of the rejected by your NCSG EC
>>>>> > representative (as Joan suggested too) .  But challenging the NCSG
>>>>> > chair and
>>>>> > NCSG EC as to why we made inquiries to some applicants will not be
>>>>> > accepted.
>>>>> > It is a governance matter which I will not compromise.   Timeline
>>>>> > adherence,
>>>>> > delay in processing, sometimes happens. I try to prevent it but
>>>>> > sometimes
>>>>> > for various reasons happen. I will try to avoid it and have a speedier
>>>>> > process. But consider that we also work with a committee of 5  and all
>>>>> > of
>>>>> > them have to comment on the applications.We also cannot accept members
>>>>> > who
>>>>> > are not responding to our inquiries because chairs of constituencies
>>>>> > have
>>>>> > been in touch with them. I have made other suggestions in my other
>>>>> > emails
>>>>> > how to tackle these issues. On my part, I will make sure that issuing
>>>>> > reports would be easy by CIVICRM design on applicants status so that
>>>>> > NCUC
>>>>> > reps on NCSG EC  can update you if needed without their sensitive
>>>>> > information being revealed.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Our choices in tech should align with our values, we have no
>>>>> >> references of practices of the company regarding ideas of diversity
>>>>> >> hiring practices, data protection etc.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I recommend you visit their website.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> At a minimum we should send out an inquiry to our members who used
>>>>> >> CivicRM and has providers they can trust.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Maybe even question altogether whether CivicRM is a good choice and
>>>>> >> if
>>>>> >> it is time to move to another system.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have looked into other options. everyone has a problem with
>>>>> > something, we
>>>>> > should just fix the design of this and continue.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I`d also wish we adopt Open Contracting practices.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Anyhow, this should be a collective EC decisiion but I hope at least
>>>>> >> we can have more info about accompanying this process from NCSG.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have sent the quotations - the processes and at the discovery phase
>>>>> > I will
>>>>> > consult with you and NPOC about the features.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I will remind you all that I've asked observer status to Constituency
>>>>> >> Chairs to the database and request was denied.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Yes. I will not permit this for the reasons I articulated. The chair
>>>>> > of
>>>>> > constituencies should not be able to challenge EC as to why inquiries
>>>>> > being
>>>>> > made. I would have been neutral if this had not happened but since it
>>>>> > did, I
>>>>> > am worried that it will happen again.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I am willing to help in any other way to make the process more
>>>>> > transparent.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> So I would like to hear more from NCSG how the SG plans to keep
>>>>> >> Constituencies informed of how half of their budget is being spent
>>>>> >> and
>>>>> >> the results achieved.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I will send reports. About the process and progress made. also we will
>>>>> > be
>>>>> > coming with an applicants approval process which will make life easier
>>>>> > for
>>>>> > NCSG EC to comment and to have reports sent to the Constituencies  EC
>>>>> > as
>>>>> > necessary.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Thanks
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Renata
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Michael Karanicolas
>>>>> >> <mkaranicolas at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> > Hi,
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Thanks for your email. Sounds like an important issue to address.
>>>>> >> > You
>>>>> >> > mention that "ICANN has set aside an annual budget for
>>>>> >> > NPOC/NCUC/NCSG
>>>>> >> > for membership management system. It went unused by NCUC last
>>>>> >> > year."
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > What is the amount of this budget? Presumably we lost last year's,
>>>>> >> > having not spent it?
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Renata or Farzi, can you confirm?
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Best,
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > Michael
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> >
>>>>> >> > On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 4:52 PM, farzaneh badii
>>>>> >> > <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> >> Joan and Renata, NCUC and NPOC EC,
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> For the betterment of NCSG, NCUC and NPOC's membership management
>>>>> >> >> system and
>>>>> >> >> elections, we need 4000 USD from each constituency from their
>>>>> >> >> ICANN
>>>>> >> >> budget
>>>>> >> >> on membership management to enhance CIVICRM  and troubleshoot
>>>>> >> >> CIVICRM
>>>>> >> >> problems. ICANN has set aside an annual budget for NPOC/NCUC/NCSG
>>>>> >> >> for
>>>>> >> >> membership management system. It went unused by NCUC last year.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> I would be grateful if we could take a  swift action on this
>>>>> >> >> preferably
>>>>> >> >> no
>>>>> >> >> later than this week otherwise we will be facing more problems
>>>>> >> >> with the
>>>>> >> >> system. At the moment the system has many glitches and has no
>>>>> >> >> support.
>>>>> >> >> We
>>>>> >> >> don't want to lose data.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Please kindly discuss and get back to me as soon as possible. I
>>>>> >> >> have
>>>>> >> >> sent
>>>>> >> >> the cost estimate off list to the chairs and NCSG EC, since the
>>>>> >> >> company
>>>>> >> >> did
>>>>> >> >> not want it to be public. I can go through what is needed with you
>>>>> >> >> if
>>>>> >> >> would
>>>>> >> >> like and if needed have a meeting with you this week. We can also
>>>>> >> >> invite
>>>>> >> >> Tapani since he was involved with the system last year and
>>>>> >> >> understands
>>>>> >> >> the
>>>>> >> >> technical needs better than me.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> P.S. I first made the cost estimates and the expenses into phases
>>>>> >> >> but
>>>>> >> >> at
>>>>> >> >> this stage and considering the status of budget I think it is
>>>>> >> >> better
>>>>> >> >> for us
>>>>> >> >> to just set aside some budget for making the system better.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> I will send  both constituencies all the receipts and the expenses
>>>>> >> >> made
>>>>> >> >> and
>>>>> >> >> submit the improvements over the course of coming months.
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Best regards,
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> Farzaneh
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>> >> >> NCUC-EC mailing list
>>>>> >> >> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>>>>> >> >> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ExCom mailing list
>>>>> ExCom at npoc.org
>>>>> http://npoc.org/mailman/listinfo/excom_npoc.org
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCUC-EC mailing list
>>> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>
>> --
>> --
>>
>> Elsa Saade
>> Consultant
>> Gulf Centre for Human Rights
>> Twitter: @Elsa_Saade
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCUC-EC mailing list
>> NCUC-EC at lists.ncuc.org
>> https://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>