[council] RE: ICANN Travel Support for 1 additional GNSO attendee to LA Meeting of CCWG - 25 & 26 September

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I do support this approach. And I do think there are objective criteria.

I think that first we should confirm whether any of the heavy
contributors like WP leads, rapporteurs & authors from the GNSO have a
way to be there.

It not we can judge based on degree of participation, like meetings
online attended and written contributions as you suggest.

avri

On 16-Sep-15 12:29, Jonathan Robinson wrote:
>
> All,
>
>  
>
> An update. I understand that there is more than one expression of
> interest from GNSO participants in the CCWG.
>
>  
>
> It strikes me that we cannot evaluate these on subjective criteria
> e.g. a motivation statement from the candidate.
>
>  
>
> One (and perhaps the only) objective criterion that we could apply is
> participation in the CCWG to date. Logs of participation are recorded
> and so we have the data.
>
> I propose to the Council that we do this and use the data to make an
> objective selection.
>
>  
>
> https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Attendance+Log+CCWG-Accountability
>
>  
>
> Since the GNSO participant will necessarily be from only one SG or
> Constituency, it seems reasonable to me that we impress on the
> selected participant / attendee that they take a broad GNSO
> perspective during the course of their participation in LA.
>
> Further, that they remain receptive to input from other GNSO
> participants, as far as possible.
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
>  
>
> Jonathan
>
>  
>
> *From:*Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson at afilias.info]
> *Sent:* 16 September 2015 13:49
> *To:* council at gnso.icann.org
> *Subject:* ICANN Travel Support for 1 additional GNSO attendee to LA
> Meeting of CCWG - 25 & 26 September
>
>  
>
> All,
>
>  
>
> ICANN has offered to support one traveller per chartering organisation
> in addition to the currently sponsored travel slots (primarily for
> members of the CCWG).
>
>  
>
> We do not have a simple process or mechanism to deal with this,
> especially in such a tight time frame.
>
>  
>
> Currently, Carlos (a GNSO Council member and participant in the CCWG)
> has volunteered to attend and take up this option.
>
> Accordingly, please be aware of this offer and communicate any
> objections or concerns you may have.
>
>  
>
> Also, if you are aware of an active CCWG participant from within your
> SG who could make effective (for the benefit of the GNSO) use of such
> funding, please check their availability and make the name known.
>
>  
>
> If more than one candidate emerges, we may need to undertake some form
> of vote.
>
>  
>
> Thanks
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Jonathan
>
>  
>
>  
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus