[council] Proposed GNSO Council Comment on FY20 ICANN Budget

[Ayden Férdeline]

If you can join the call, Martin, that would be great - we can wordsmith this particular paragraph live along with the SCBO's Subject Matter Experts and other interested Councilors. I will forward you the meeting invitation.

Ayden

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Thursday, January 24, 2019 7:56 PM, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ayden,
> As long as we take out those specific programs, I agree with the rest of the text. I don’t think the ambassadors hurt as well. I can give a proposed change, but it will be the same text minus those few words less. I am gonna try to be in the call. Thanks!
>
> Best,
> Martín
>
>> On 24 Jan 2019, at 21:52, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Martín, we have tabled your comments for discussion on the SCBO's call on Monday. If possible, are you able to suggest alternative language for the SCBO's review? I ask because I think our current language calls for these programs to be rightsized following an evaluation of their effectiveness, which does not necessarily entail a cut. Or are you suggesting that the entire paragraph should be deleted?
>>
>> Best wishes, Ayden
>>
>> ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
>> On Thursday, January 24, 2019 7:42 PM, Martin Pablo Silva Valent <mpsilvavalent at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ayden,,
>>> Thank you very much for all the work being done. I fully support the comment, but I do have one objection. I do not think we all agree that program that have just been cut in half like the fellowship should be escalated down. I do share that I don’t fully know all programs from at-large and staff relating to this outreach and on boarding efforts, but I defiantly don’t believe that the NextGen nor the Fellowship are the problem or the concern. Specially when our call for modifications and cut downs were heard and are being implemented.
>>> Other than that, excluding from the text our concerns with fellowship and NextGen, which I believe are not bloated nor lack of good results, I support the rest.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Martín
>>>
>>>> On 24 Jan 2019, at 20:58, Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear all,
>>>>
>>>> On behalf of the GNSO Council's Standing Committee on ICANN Budget and Operations, please find attached our draft comment on the proposed FY20 Budget and Operating Plan for your review and consideration. Absent any objections from a member of the Council we are seeking to submit this comment on behalf of the GNSO Council on 8 February 2019.
>>>>
>>>> We have our next call on Monday, 28 January at 14:00 UTC. If you have any questions, concerns, or suggested edits which you can share before this call, we will gladly table them for discussion on this call. Alternatively we can address any concerns or questions that are raised after 28 January via email.
>>>>
>>>> If possible, please raise any concerns by 1 February 2019 at 14:00 UTC so that the SCBO is able to address these concerns and to share a revised draft with the Council with sufficient time for you to review the final version. Thank you!
>>>>
>>>> Finally, there is one paragraph in the proposed comment that is highlighted in yellow. This is in reference to the Document Drafting and Development pilot program. At this time the SCBO does not have a firm view on whether or not this text should remain. We would appreciate input from the Council on whether or not this paragraph should remain, be edited, or deleted.
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>> Ayden Férdeline
>>>> <ICANN FY20 Draft ICANN Budget - GNSO Comments_v0.6 - clean.docx><ICANN FY20 Draft ICANN Budget - GNSO Comments_v0.6 - clean.pdf>_______________________________________________
>>>> council mailing list
>>>> council at gnso.icann.org
>>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/council/attachments/20190125/8f035373/attachment.html>