<div dir="auto">If that was the case then the governance of it should have been at the NCSG level like the council is. But it is not. Each constituency appoints their own reps and nobody can tell them how they allocated their slots. <br clear="all"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><font face="verdana, sans-serif" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;color:rgb(0,0,0)">Farzaneh </font></div></div></div></div></div><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 10:14 AM Johan Helsingius <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com">julf@julf.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)">The way I see it is that the slots are intended for EC members, and once<br>
on the EC, the members really represent NCSG, not NCUC/NPOC.<br>
<br>
Julf<br>
<br>
<br>
On 25/06/2024 09:14, farzaneh badii wrote:<br>
> I disagree with your interpretation Julf of the operating procedures. I <br>
> find it dangerous to allocate one constituency EC travel slot to <br>
> another, I also think as a matter of transparency we should announce the <br>
> travel slot available on the NCSG mailing list and ask NCUC members who <br>
> also could be the members of NPOC to apply. I don’t understand what the <br>
> problem is with opening this up. And no I don’t think NPOC NCSG EC reps <br>
> should decide for NCUC NCSG EC reps travel slots. We open it up, Tapani <br>
> can apply.<br>
> <br>
> Farzaneh<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 8:54 AM Johan Helsingius <<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com" target="_blank">julf@julf.com</a> <br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:julf@julf.com" target="_blank">julf@julf.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> On 25/06/2024 07:48, farzaneh badii via NCSG-EC wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > I believe these two travel slots belong to NCUC NCSG EC reps. I<br>
> believe<br>
> > the best course of action here is to provide an opportunity for NCUC<br>
> > members to apply.<br>
> <br>
> Reading the NCSG Operating Procedures rules for NCSG<br>
> Travel Slot Transfer,<br>
> <a href="https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Operating+Procedures#OperatingProcedures-996937310" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Operating+Procedures#OperatingProcedures-996937310</a> <<a href="https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Operating+Procedures#OperatingProcedures-996937310" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Operating+Procedures#OperatingProcedures-996937310</a>><br>
> <br>
> 1. The NCSG receives the following travel slots per meeting:<br>
> <br>
> a. At the annual Policy Forum and the annual Community Forum,<br>
> the NCSG receives 6 slots for Council members, and 3 slots<br>
> for NCSG Executive Committee members, being a total of 9<br>
> travel slots.<br>
> <br>
> b. At the Annual General Meeting, the NCSG receives travel slots<br>
> for all incoming and outgoing Councilors (a minimum of 6 slots<br>
> and a maximum of 9 slots, depending on whether or not new<br>
> persons are rotating into the Council) as well as 3 travel<br>
> slots to be allocated to the to NCSG Executive Committee.<br>
> <br>
> So the 3 travel slots belong to the EC. Usually one slot is for<br>
> the (incoming) chair, and one each to a NCUC and a NPOC rep. Only<br>
> if EC members are unable to use the slots are they offered to<br>
> the wider membership. In this case two of the four EC reps<br>
> can use the slots - but they both happen to be from NPOC.<br>
> <br>
> Julf<br>
> <br>
</blockquote></div></div>