Suggested Comment - ICANN Reserve Fund
Zakir Syed
zakirbinrehman at YAHOO.COM
Tue Dec 26 16:18:02 EET 2017
+1 Ayden. Also, while reconsidering the expenditure would be helpful to address the challenge, getting revenues up could do the trick too since the President (in the blog post) notes "lower domain name registrations than planned." ...CHALLENGE... Anyways, lets wait for the budget which will be out for public comment mid-January 2018.
Best,
Zakir
From: Ayden Férdeline <icann at FERDELINE.COM>
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2017 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: Suggested Comment - ICANN Reserve Fund
Just to follow up on the below comment from Sala last month -
In the comment that the NCSG submitted in relation to the Reserve Fund, we expressed our concern that income had stopped growing and we thought it was trending downwards.
We now have confirmation from ICANN org that this is true and that our analysis was correct. ICANN has now published a blog post in which the President and CEO says the following:
"... we saw slower funding in the first quarter of FY18 by $1m versus our approved budget, with lower domain name registrations than planned. So, we believe the FY18 funding could remain flat compared to FY17's funding, instead of the growth budgeted in FY18. We need to make some changes to address that. And, at the same time, we are currently planning for the next two years out – FY19 and FY20. We are also forecasting lower funding for FY19 compared to the approved FY18 budget... As a non-profit it is important that we stay within our budget. ... The reality is, ICANN has a significant budget but not an infinite budget. We need to make some changes, and can't do everything we are asked. You as the ICANN community will feel the impact of some of those changes."
Clearly, the organisation does need to reconsider unnecessary expenditure, but it is not acceptable that we in the community feel the brunt of this impact.
Community support is not a sizeable part of the ICANN budget; the bulk of which is consumed by personnel costs, particularly staff travel, performance bonuses, and consultant costs.
—Ayden
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Suggested Comment - ICANN Reserve Fund
Local Time: 14 November 2017 9:54 PM
UTC Time: 14 November 2017 21:54
From: sala at PASIFIKANEXUS.NU
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Dear All,
Warm Greetings!
- Not take away from Ayden's work and this is not a criticism against Ayden but just merely on the draft document on google.
- I personally do not agree with the recommendations and would like to see at least a table breaking down the relevant rations to allow for proper trend analysis.
- Secondly, previous financial audits would be available to assess whether constituency goals within the broader strategic development plans and budgets should be assessed on clear deliverables on sanctioned initiatives within the broader ICANN Framework.
- I have yet to see a paper on this from within the NCSG and if it was done and I missed it, grateful if somebody could send this to me so I can catch up on reading it. This might already have been done by the Finance Team so we just need to ask for it if we don't have it already.
- Once we see the last 4 years ratios and also assess the growth of external actions against ICANN, we can easily project and forecast percentage of risks to ICANN;
- I caution against making recommendations without the presence of financial analysis (trend analysis) and that this should be put to the community before we offer an input into specific recommendations.
- At the moment, the Statement is an opinion (which might very well be shared amongst others) but one that is void of financial analysis and risk management (aside from the comment on to increase the "suggested 17 months target level" to the 24 months.
- My apologies if the financial analysis was done along with the ratios and is on some wiki page that I have not accessed yet, just please point me to the right place and I will read and send comments in.
Sincerely,
Sala
On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 4:45 AM, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:
Arsene
Anyone can see the comments that were “resolved” by clicking on the “Comments” button in the upper right corner of the page. If you want to “re-open” a comment thread, you can do so by clicking the blue “re-open” link.
--MM
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV. SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Arsène Tungali
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 9:07 AM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: Suggested Comment - ICANN Reserve Fund
Hi Ayden,
Thanks for working on the doc and thanks to those who were able to chim in to provide more substance or clarification.
I hate Google docs because they allow the author to decide to "Resolve" comments even when they haven't reached consensus. Now for anyone who would like to go back to check the document, they won't be able to see the comments and the way they were adressed. This is unfortunate and I would request next time, the author of the document to leave the comments and only when the author feels they have been adressed, then to consider them as "Resolved".
I would like to call on everyone here to check my concerns in this thread and then check the Google doc to agree with me whether they have been adressed or not. Also, please do share your thoughts by editing the document directly as a way to improve it (if appropriate).
Thank you very much,
Arsene
------------------------
*Arsène Tungali*
Co-Founder & Executive Director, Rudi international,
CEO, Smart Services Sarl, Mabingwa Forum
Tel: +243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
2015 Mandela Washington Felllow (YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil & Mexico) - AFRISIG 2016 - Blogger - ICANN Fellow (Los Angeles & Marrakech). AFRINIC Fellow (Mauritius) - IGFSA Member - Internet Governance - Internet Freedom.
Check the 2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC report (English) and (French)
2017-11-13 16:39 GMT+02:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
Hi Arsene,
I have now responded to all of your comments in the Google Doc. I encourage you to propose edits to the text directly if you think that the statement can be improved. It is a collaborative process, with the document open for all to edit and shape. In my experience it can be easy to criticise or object to something, but a lot more challenging to come up with evidence-informed, alternative recommendations.
Best wishes, Ayden
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Suggested Comment - ICANN Reserve Fund
Local Time: 13 November 2017 11:15 AM
UTC Time: 13 November 2017 11:15
From: arsenebaguma at gmail.com
To: Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>
NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU <NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu >
Thanks Ayden,
I will try and input most of these comments into the doc directly and
hope they will be adressed.
Regards,
Arsene
2017-11-13 12:48 UTC+02:00, Ayden Férdeline icann at ferdeline.com:
Hi Arsene,
You are welcome to propose edits to the text directly. The Google Doc is
open for all to edit and shape, and I note that you managed to comment on
another one roughly 30 minutes ago. As a reminder, this is just proposed
text and of course not yet endorsed by the NCSG, so nothing is final and
edits are still possible. That being said, if I may politely suggest you
first read the supporting material which I linked to in my initial email, it
might be helpful to see what it is that ICANN is requesting that we comment
on.
Thanks,
Ayden
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Suggested Comment - ICANN Reserve Fund
Local Time: 13 November 2017 10:33 AM
UTC Time: 13 November 2017 10:33
From: arsenebaguma at GMAIL.COM
To: NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Hi Ayden,
Thanks for pulling together this comment.
I am sending here few comments as my network doesn’t allow me to work
on the Google doc now. I don’t have a very good background with
finances or budgets, but I will try to share few comments bellow.
First, I am in total agreement with you that ICANN should not consider
taking away from the new gTLD Auction Proceeds funds as these should
not seek to cover ICANN’s operating expenses but support external
projects that align with ICANN’s mission. This discussion has been
happening in the AP WG and that was my point as well.
“However, given the organisation’s unusual risk profile, we would
encourage the organisation to set a target level for the Reserve Fund
of a minimum of 24 months of operating expenses.”
Is there any reason why you are requesting this, Ayden?
If the org is failing to keep the fund to a minimum of 12 months, I
think it is asking too much for now (though it would be great if they
are able to) to ask them to keep a minimum of 24 months. I would
suggest this comment to focus on helping them to be able to stick and
ensure they remain with a minimum of 12 months as they have been doing
trying to do since 2007.
“However, there are many ways in which ICANN could cut funding”
Thanks for suggesting some ways ICANN can cut down some of its
expenses and call them on being more responsible with the way they
make expenses. Many of these suggestions are valid after a quick look
but need to be looked at in deep in order to ensure we all have the
same opinion as the NCSG.
I do agree with a comment I read that these can be more relevant
suggestions with regards to the Operating Funds not the Reserve Funds.
Can we work on another comment in the future (not sure whether there
is an open comment on Operating Funds) and present these arguments
instead?
I know you have personal reasons or strong opinions with regards to
the Fellowship program but I don’t think this is the right place to
present that because there is no general agreement within the NCSG on
what needs to be our response with regards to the Fellowship program
and its expenses. I am sure many of us agree that there is a need to
review this program though. I think this can be the subject of a
different discussion that needs to happen before we can present it as
the NCSG opinion.
With regards to GSE expenses, I would appreciate to have a reference
that supports this claim or if you could expand more here on what you
mean because this can be seen as a pure claim with no evidences. Are
you saying that the GSE is making expenses for activities that are out
of ICANN’s remit?
I would not like to sound like commenting on all these suggested ways
for ICANN to cut its expenses but I think for an NCSG comment, we may
need to base our current and future comments on issues we have openly
discussed on the list and where we seemed to have an agreement and
only have been waiting for an opportunity to make them public as a
stance.
So, I would strongly suggest that we don’t make suggestions (unless
someone has other suggestions) and stick to the fact that ICANN should
carefully look at the way they make expenses in their operations and
use some of the remainder to replenish the Reserve Funds. I wish I was
able to provide more.
I would like to thank you, Ayden for holding the pen here again
(something many of us here are not yet able to do) but I would call
for caution that we should not seek to use NCSG to channel personal
opinions. I would instead encourage whenever we have a concern or an
opinion over something, to raise it with the membership, discuss it
and then when there is an opportunity to publicly address them, then
we can use NCSG voice to raise them.
Thank you very much,
Arsene
2017-11-12 14:46 UTC+02:00, Carlos Raul Gutierrez crg at isoc-cr.org:
Dear Ayden,
thanks a lot for this excellent draft, which by the way updated me and
gave
me a very good picture of the whole discussion.
Based on my own experience, ICANN high dependency on a stream of fees
directly related to the size of the DNS market is a problem of capture in
waiting. Most entities that deal with such dynamic markets (I'm no going
to
use the word) tend to prefer vaccinate themselves from the illusion of an
endless source of income, by developing a cost based budget first, and
justifying every year its budget to the providers of income, instead of
defending a TAX or cut of their business.
My humble suggestion is that within your suggestion that the Board would
think a little bit harder about this issue, we include the general notion
of a cost based budgeting system, as an important step to reduce the risk
of inflated expectations about the growth potential of the DNS market of
the present tax based system. Some new gTLDs are not sustainable under
the
present cost structure of the ICANN Corporation, and it would be a pity
to
limit the innovation and openness of the DNS just because its structure
is
so expensive to maintain.
Thanks again for your work and considering my ideas.
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
ISOC Costa Rica Chapter
skype carlos.raulg
+506 8837 7176
Apartado 1571-1000
COSTA RICA
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Ayden Férdeline icann at ferdeline.com
wrote:
Hi,
I have drafted a response on behalf of the NCSG regarding ICANN's
Reserve
Fund. The call for public comments and supporting documentation can be
found
here https://www.icann.org/public- comments/reserve-fund-2017-10- 12-en.
The proposed comment that I have drafted is on Google Docs here
https://docs.google.com/ document/d/1WJICv5BgHyBIo_ o3twOkK0BZDyALIvZYjKXiY5s3RgI/ edit?usp=sharing.
This is a rough draft; your comments will be instrumental in shaping the
final version, if the NCSG choses to submit one. But for now I welcome
your
constructive edits to the text. Thank you.
—Ayden
Arsène Tungali http://about.me/ArseneTungali
Co-Founder & Executive Director, Rudi international
http://www.rudiinternational. org,
CEO,* Smart Services Sarl http://www.smart-serv.info*, Mabingwa Forum
http://www.mabingwa-forum.com
Tel: +243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
2015 Mandela Washington Felllow
http://tungali.blogspot.com/ 2015/06/selected-for-2015- mandela-washington.html
(YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil
http://www.internetsociety. org/what-we-do/education-and- leadership-programmes/next- generation-leaders/igf- ambassadors-programme/Past- Ambassadors
& Mexico
http://www.internetsociety. org/what-we-do/education-and- leadership-programmes/next- generation-leaders/Current- Ambassadors)
- AFRISIG 2016 http://afrisig.org/afrisig- 2016/class-of-2016/ - Blogger
http://tungali.blogspot.com - ICANN Fellow (Los Angeles
https://www.icann.org/news/ announcement-2014-07-18-en & Marrakech
https://www.icann.org/ resources/pages/marrakech55- attendees-2016-03-14-en
). AFRINIC Fellow (Mauritius
http://www.afrinic.net/en/ library/news/1907-afrinic-25- fellowship-winners)*
- *IGFSA Member http://www.igfsa.org/ - Internet Governance - Internet
Freedom.
Check the 2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC report (English
http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=234 ) and (French
http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=242 )
--
Arsène Tungali http://about.me/ArseneTungali
Co-Founder & Executive Director, Rudi international
http://www.rudiinternational. org,CEO,* Smart Services Sarl http://www.smart-serv.info*, Mabingwa Forum
http://www.mabingwa-forum.comTel: +243 993810967
GPG: 523644A0
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
2015 Mandela Washington Felllow
http://tungali.blogspot.com/ 2015/06/selected-for-2015- mandela-washington.html
(YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil
http://www.internetsociety. org/what-we-do/education-and- leadership-programmes/next- generation-leaders/igf- ambassadors-programme/Past- Ambassadors
& Mexico
http://www.internetsociety. org/what-we-do/education-and- leadership-programmes/next- generation-leaders/Current- Ambassadors)
- AFRISIG 2016 http://afrisig.org/afrisig- 2016/class-of-2016/ - Blogger
http://tungali.blogspot.com - ICANN Fellow (Los Angeles
https://www.icann.org/news/ announcement-2014-07-18-en & Marrakech
https://www.icann.org/ resources/pages/marrakech55- attendees-2016-03-14-en
). AFRINIC Fellow (Mauritius
http://www.afrinic.net/en/ library/news/1907-afrinic-25- fellowship-winners)*
- *IGFSA Member http://www.igfsa.org/ - Internet Governance - Internet
Freedom.
Check the 2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC report (English
http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=234 ) and (French
http://cipesa.org/?wpfb_dl=242 )
--
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
Director
Pasifika Nexus
P.O Box 17862
Suva
FIJI
Cell: +679 7656770
Tel: +679 3362003
E: sala at pasifikanexus.nu
Website: www.pasifikanexus.nu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20171226/5dbbbfa5/attachment.htm>
More information about the Ncsg-discuss
mailing list