NCPH Intersessional timing

Edward Morris egmorris1 at TOAST.NET
Wed Nov 30 15:38:54 EET 2016 

Hi James,

I'll speak only for myself as I was on the call.

The working assumption seems to be Reykjavik, pending input from the ICANN Meeting staff. We were then asked to identify secondary choices if Iceland for whatever reason did not work out.

My suggestion, in the chat, was Nice. I made the suggestion after considering the fact that we do have a few ICANN staff members who live in the Nice-Cannes area who could easily attend, Nice has a decent international airport with reasonable connections worldwide and direct flights to Europe, Africa and North America, it is low season there so prices hopefully would be reasonable and suitable facilities abound.

I'm not sure who proposed the other locations. Hopefully they will respond. Thanks for the question.

Ed

Sent from my iPhone

> On 30 Nov 2016, at 19:16, James Gannon <james at CYBERINVASION.NET> wrote:
> 
> Can I ask which of those locations were suggested by NCSG?
> 
> -James
> 
> From: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
> Reply-To: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
> Date: Wednesday 30 November 2016 at 19:02
> To: James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
> Cc: "NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
> Subject: Re: NCPH Intersessional timing
> 
> So I have just been reviewing the transcript from the call on the 29th, and I am going to copy and paste the exotic litany of cities that were suggested for this intersessional:
> 
> "Reykjavík, Stockholm, Nice, Portugal, Spain, Barcelona, Azores, Bermuda, Cape Verde Islands, South Georgia island, Tokyo, Hobart, Nu'uk, Edinburgh or Glasgow, London, Cardiff, Wales"
> 
> The Azores, really? I spent four days in Ponta Delgada last year and beautiful as it may be, the island only has intermittent Internet access, so remote participation would be out of the question. It also does not have daily flights, except to Lisbon, and we have no active community members in the vicinity. Is this really the most sensible location to suggest?
> 
> I continue to maintain it is a waste of resources to the extreme to debate rotating this meeting, which is not public facing and is not for outreach, between anything other than ICANN hubs. 
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Ayden Férdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline
> 
> 
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: NCPH Intersessional timing
>> Local Time: 29 November 2016 8:17 AM
>> UTC Time: 29 November 2016 08:17
>> From: james at CYBERINVASION.NET
>> To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> 
>> https://www.mobileworldcongress.com/
>> 
>> MWC is 27 Feb - 2 March.
>> 
>> -James
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 29/11/2016, 08:06, "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of Milan, Stefania" <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU on behalf of Stefania.Milan at EUI.EU> wrote:
>> 
>> >Was RightsCon mentioned already? March 29-31
>> >
>> >
>> >________________________________________
>> >Da: NCSG-Discuss <NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU> per conto di Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at TAPANI.TARVAINEN.INFO>
>> >Inviato: martedì 29 novembre 2016 08.24.23
>> >A: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> >Oggetto: Re: NCPH Intersessional timing
>> >
>> >Thank you Stephanie and Ines.
>> >
>> >That makes it clear enough that February is our first choice.
>> >
>> >As for the potential conflicts, I got nothing absolute (as in, "I will
>> >definitely be going there") but a few potential ("may go") conflicts
>> >for April/May:
>> >
>> >Russian IGF, April 7-10
>> >Internet 2: Global Summit, Washington DC April 23-26
>> >IOT Forum, Madrid April 26
>> >RIPE meeting, Budapest May 8-12
>> >
>> >Some people also pointed out that Easter is in mid-April and would
>> >in effect make 13-17 April inpractical.
>> >
>> >Nobody has as yet offered any specific ICANN/IG events in August-September
>> >timeframe, but the beginning of academic year impedes several people then.
>> >
>> >If you have other potential conflicts in mind, please let me know ASAP.
>> >
>> >Tapani
>> >
>> >On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 09:23:53PM -0500, hfaiedh ines (hfaiedh.ines2 at GMAIL.COM) wrote:
>> >
>> >> I vote February, sorry for missing the vote.
>> >>
>> >> 2016-11-28 17:53 GMT-05:00 Stephanie Perrin <
>> >> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca>:
>> >>
>> >> > I apologise for not voting....no internet access. I vote February.
>> >> > Stephanie
>> >> >
>> >> > Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Bell network.
>> >> > Original Message
>> >> > From: Tapani Tarvainen
>> >> > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:43 AM
>> >> > To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
>> >> > Reply To: Tapani Tarvainen
>> >> > Subject: NCPH Intersessional timing
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Dear all,
>> >> >
>> >> > Poll results from the intersessional timing options were, unfortunately
>> >> > but not unexpectedly, not conclusive. The choices could have been better
>> >> > phrased - some people emailed me offlist about that - but time was short.
>> >> >
>> >> > As it is, only 1 (can't make it) was clearly defined, the rest were
>> >> > basically just a scale of preferability, and so averaging them out
>> >> > makes at least some sense.
>> >> >
>> >> > Here's a summary of results, for each category and month averages
>> >> > (excluding "no opinion" ones) and in parentheses the number of "can't
>> >> > make it" choices:
>> >> >
>> >> > count category Feb Apr-May Aug-Sep
>> >> > 4 Councillors 3.7(1) 2.7(1) 2.0(2)
>> >> > 3 NCSG EC 3.7(1) 3.5(0) 2.0(0)
>> >> > 1 NCSG PC 5.0(0) 2.0(0) 3.0(0)
>> >> > 4 NCUC EC 4.8(0) 3.0(1) 3.5(0)
>> >> > 2 NPOC EC 4.5(0) 3.5(0) 4.0(0)
>> >> > 10 Other 3.3(2) 4.1(1) 3.7(2)
>> >> >
>> >> > 14 All except "Other" 4.2(2) 3.1(2) 3.4(2)
>> >> > 24 All 3.9(4) 3.5(3) 3.5(4)
>> >> >
>> >> > My conclusion is that there's no really strong preference to any,
>> >> > but February is slightly preferred (especially if we give less
>> >> > weight to "Other" category, who are less likely to participate).
>> >> >
>> >> > A couple of people commented that the latter two choices, but
>> >> > especially April/May, would depend a lot on the exact date:
>> >> > there're lots of other meetings and events people will be
>> >> > participating in that timeframe.
>> >> >
>> >> > The time should be decided tomorrow. Before that, we should try to
>> >> > answer the questions posed by Tony Holmes below.
>> >> >
>> >> > For the first one I guess we can answer "no": none of the times impose
>> >> > severe constraints for us, even though all of them are bad for at
>> >> > least two council/EC members.
>> >> >
>> >> > For question 4 it's not clear-cut, but given the poll results
>> >> > I'd suggest order would be (1) Feb (2) Aug-Sep (3) Apr-May
>> >> > (the latter two decided by non-Other category).
>> >> >
>> >> > For questions 2 and 3 I'd like to ask you all what other
>> >> > ICANN/IGF-related events you may be participating in the
>> >> > timeframes given (to reduce clutter on the list you can
>> >> > send them just to me and I'll summarize them here).
>> >> >
>> >> > Tapani
>> >> >
>> >> > ----- Forwarded message from tonyarholmes <tonyarholmes at btinternet.com>
>> >> > -----
>> >> >
>> >> > Rob/All
>> >> >
>> >> > We agreed we will try and nail the date for the next intercessional during
>> >> > a
>> >> > 30 minute call next week.
>> >> >
>> >> > To try and avert what Klaus described as 'going around in circles', perhaps
>> >> > the following approach could help narrow the options prior to that call.
>> >> >
>> >> > It appeared that the possibility of tagging an intercessional on to the
>> >> > front or end of the Copenhagen or Johannesburg meetings was dismissed,
>> >> > which
>> >> > left us with 3 options on the table at the end of the call;
>> >> >
>> >> > - Week beginning February 13th
>> >> >
>> >> > - Late April/beginning of May
>> >> >
>> >> > - Beyond Johannesburg (effectively late Aug/early Sept)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Suggest as representatives from our respective groups, in advance of the
>> >> > call we try and respond to Rob on the following questions;
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > 1. Do any of those options impose severe constraints on the ability
>> >> > of
>> >> > your members to attend? If so, what are they and can they be overcome?
>> >> >
>> >> > 2. During the suggested time frame for late April/beginning of May
>> >> > are
>> >> > there major conflicts due to other Internet Governance, Regional, standards
>> >> > bodies, trade association, other, meetings? If so what are they and when
>> >> > will they take place?
>> >> >
>> >> > 3. Beyond Johannesburg, late Aug/early Sept, are there major
>> >> > conflicts due to other Internet Governance, Regional, standards bodies,
>> >> > trade association, other meetings? If so what are they and when will they
>> >> > take place?
>> >> >
>> >> > 4. Can you rank the 3 options on the table in order of preference.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > If it proves possible to do this it may help focus thoughts during our 30
>> >> > minute call. Just a suggestion.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards
>> >> >
>> >> > Tony
>> >> >
>> >> > ----- End forwarded message -----
>> >> >
>> >
>> >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20161130/1937bf99/attachment.htm>

More information about the Ncsg-discuss mailing list