[Gnso-sc-budget] Ideas for inclusion in our comment on the FY19 budget

[Ayden Férdeline]

Hi Marilyn,

Thanks for your comments. The Standing Committee has not discussed any of these ideas in depth just yet. The email I sent yesterday was only a strawman proposal; it was intended to generate discussion and to provoke the generation of new and better ideas. Nothing is set in stone and on our coming call on Monday (and on this mailing list) we can continue to debate what should or should not be included within our comment.

On the question of who is speaking, when I referred to 'We' in my initial email, I was referring to the GNSO Council, who will ultimately be asked to submit the comment that this Standing Committee drafts.

Many thanks,

Ayden

-------- Original Message --------
On 9 February 2018 1:21 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:

> I am not sure that we have discussed this sufficiently, Ayden.
>
> I offer some thoughts below.
> They are in italics for adds, and  [  ] for cuts.  I apologize, but until I get my replacement laptop, I am handicapped in terms of how to comment.
>
> M
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: Gnso-sc-budget <gnso-sc-budget-bounces at icann.org> on behalf of Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 4:04 PM
> To: Ayden Férdeline
> Cc: gnso-sc-budget at icann.org
> Subject: Re: [Gnso-sc-budget] Ideas for inclusion in our comment on the FY19 budget
>
> I support this comments!
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> On 8 Feb 2018 10:17, "Ayden Férdeline" <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Some other thoughts that I had after reviewing the budget documents — is there support for including any of these comments in our statement? If so, I can elaborate further:
>>
>> - [insert who we are that are speaking here] seriously question  [ oppose] ICANN’s proposal to reduce the additional budgetary request envelope by more than 50% in FY19. This will almost inevitably result in important community requests for support from across the GNSO and other SO/ACs not receiving needed funding to fulfill their engagement in outreach and on boarding new members. .
>>
>> - who is saying this? ]thank ICANN for its continued support of the Non-Contracted Parties House Intersessional and the Contracted Parties House Global Domains Division Summit, and welcome their inclusion in the core budget for FY19.
>>
>> - We are cognisant of the low uptake of ICANN’s language services and the high cost involved in delivering real-time interpretation. We therefore support ICANN in its efforts to focus translation and interpretation resources based on community documented need. [The Council] We  would like to help ICANN identify these needs within the GNSO Policy Council's own activities and the policy coordination activities [ projects] which we manage.
>>
>> - We wish to express our gratitude to ICANN that the GNSO Policy Council has not been negatively impacted by the proposed cuts to the number of funded seats for constituency travellers to public ICANN meetings in FY19.   However, we recognize that the significant cuts on the additional budgetary requests will have negative impacts on the engagement of other members of the GNSO's constituencies, and as we rely on the inputs and advice and participation of the broader members of each of the constituencies, and the At Large, we foresee negative implications also impacting the policy work of the gNSO Policy Council, particularly in engagement in various working groups, where members of the Constituencies are engaging, not necessarily the gNSO Policy Councilors.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing your thoughts on whether or not it would be appropriate to include any of these statements in our comment, along with any other suggested additions or observations that you may have. Thanks
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gnso-sc-budget mailing list
>> Gnso-sc-budget at icann.org
>> [https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-sc-budget](https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmm.icann.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fgnso-sc-budget&data=02%7C01%7C%7C8c331227867a4d5d5b0d08d56f378f14%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636537206763086620&sdata=oP%2Bmy5Xcmvgb%2Bl1f1Kj%2F8csl2LRmC9l%2BY4YX3HsUL9w%3D&reserved=0)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-sc-budget/attachments/20180209/1308fe33/attachment-0001.html>