NCSG Travel Policy Lacks Inclusivity Please

[Remmy Nweke]

Dear Prof. Milton

Frankly speaking, I am equally surprised to see how people have turned this
discussion or made some of us to believe.

I will not respond outside that my name was mentioned instead of the
subject, so I will share my last note to our chair, Farzaneh, hereby
brought forward.

"Thanks @Farzaneh for accepting some of the points.

I know that, invariably the fact that NCSG-FC is operating under NCSG
umbrella is still not clear to many of us in NCSG.

I still did not understand why two statutory committees have one taken
prominent over another when it comes to operational policy guidelines. That
is my point and its not correct. It’s a policy document for use by NCSG
internal operations of NCSG, therefore, mere mention of one without the
other negates the purpose.

May be we can reconsider use of NCSG committees, rather than having a
particular committee reflect in a working/guiding document, so as to make
open for all committees statutorily created under NCSG to operate evenly,
which I think should equally reflect in this document to take care of the
inferences (NCSG Committees including NCSG-FC and NCSG-PC); notwithstanding
if one is favoured in terms of EC decision should be a different ball game.

A lot of our community members have been made to believe its all about
travel slots for FC versus PC, Its NOT and I wish to convey this.
Thank you"
And thank again sir.
RN

On Mon, 9 Jul 2018 3:43 pm Mueller, Milton L, <milton at gatech.edu> wrote:

> Remmy, Thato
>
>
>
> Your messages disturb me. You seem to be approaching GNSO Council travel
> slots as if they were funded by NCSG and distributed by the Finance
> Committee.
>
> The Finance Committee has nothing to do with this. GNSO Council travel
> slots are funded by  ICANN. NCSG does not raise, and does not distribute,
> ICANN’s funds.
>
>
>
> What makes this more disturbing is the feeling that some people are more
> interested in free travel than in actually working on the very tough and
> demanding DNS policy issues. NCSG’s ONLY reason for existence is to
> formulate DNS policies in the GNSO. It is not a travel agency or a tourism
> enterprise. GNSO Council members need to go to meetings to participate in
> that policy work. Most of the money to support that travel comes from ICANN
> org.
>
>
>
> Please tell me I am wrong or misreading your intention, I hope I am. But I
> am getting tired of seeing people’s eyes light up at the sight of what they
> think is “free money” and squabbling over how that money is distributed
> when I see no corresponding interest in doing the policy work. The money is
> there to support the work, full stop. If you are not a Council member or an
> alternate who is capable of filling in for one, you don’t get guaranteed
> travel support.
>
>
>
> We are all stretched from working on the Whois/ePDP issue. Our Council
> members just fought off an attempt to stack the deck of the ePDP
> https://www.internetgovernance.org/2018/07/03/stacking-the-deck-the-epdp-on-the-whois-temp-spec/
> Do you have any idea how much time and work that took? Where were you as
> this was going on?
>
>
>
> We feel short-handed because our opponents in these PDPs have professional
> lawyers working almost full time on it. If you want to be involved in that
> you need to get some experience and prove some results.
>
>
>
> Finally, I would say if NCSG Finance Committee wants to _distribute_
>  money, they first have to _*raise*_ money. That’s the way it works.
>
>
>
> --MM
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* NCSG-Discuss [mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] *On Behalf Of
> *James Gannon
> *Sent:* Sunday, July 8, 2018 6:02 AM
> *To:* NCSG-DISCUSS at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
> *Subject:* Re: NCSG Travel Policy Lacks Inclusivity Please
>
>
>
> The FC should assess any financial impacts on NCSG (None) and pass that
> feedback back to the Chair.
>
>
>
> To use it as an opportunity for travel slots is frankly unbelievable.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>
> On 8 Jul 2018, at 11:59, Thato Mfikwe <thatomfikwe at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi James,
>
>
>
> For background, the travel policy document was shared with the FC, the FC
> did not initiate this discussion, that is when comments started. Now, was
> the FC supposed to ignore its content, document link or email?
>
> To understand your question more clearly, are you stating that if the NCSG
> FC happens to see this document, as it is the case right now, and it
> notices that it is not equally listed or acknowledge in NCSG policy doc as
> much as its sister committee, the PC, does it (the FC) have no right at all
> to comment or inquire on the subject matter?
>
>
>
> Please clarify, maybe we were not meant to see it and if that was the case
> maybe it was meant to remain private.
>
>
>
> Thato Mfikwe.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 11:15 AM, James Gannon <james at cyberinvasion.net>
> wrote:
>
> I really have no understanding of how a discussion/policy of GNSO Council
> travel reallocation (A policy function) has anything to do with the Finance
> Committe (A finance function)?
>
> -J
>
>
>
>
>
> On 8 Jul 2018, at 09:40, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Good morning from the city of Lagos,
>
>
>
> Dear Farzaneh
>
> It's not my intention to ask for more if a level playing ground to enable
> both committees have relative environment to co-exist as subjects of NCSG
> is established, if you do not create that space, especially with Finance. I
> do not understand why we expect to have improvement in a precess especially
> finance/funding without providing the enabling environment and probably
> equal opportunities.
>
>
>
> Yes, there is need for more activities on the side of Finance Committee
> which the current team is trying to address as I stated before, which must
> be done over time, but not when we are dealing with policies that guides an
> Organisation like NCSG, which often outlives most of us in NCSG. Our
> policies especially at NCSG must live beyond us more so when it's for
> internal best practices and process with a open mind.
>
>
>
> If we want the Finance Committee to work, the excuses being adduced of
> mentioning specifically in a policy document a precise committee out of the
> only two statutories does not hold. And I think that Is what the current
> policy depicts. We must all help build the finance committee we want, not
> wanting magics.
>
>
>
> I have outlined most of the responsibilities earlier which will soon be
> restated in the operational procedures, we must see beyond my bringing this
> matter of FC to the house to the steps in building and strengthening the
> Finance Committee we want.
>
>
>
> There seems to be little knowledge of what NCSG-Finance Committee *is*
> and *should be*, hence we want to correct this by engaging our community
> and stakeholders more, which cannot be done under relegation of any color.
>
>
>
> We cannot have two children and Favour one and expect both to be excitedly
> doing well or better still send a child to the market with salt and then
> send rain after him.
>
>
>
> I still appreciated those who made comments on this, it helped in bringing
> more light to the table, and until the table is bright enough for us all to
> see what is on the other side, the light is not visible enough and that is
> when transparency and accountability can be said to have improved in NCSG
> as a family.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Remmy Nweke
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2018 at 1:33 AM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I removed the paragraph about policy committee but I cannot change this
> paragraph
>
> a.    c.If the applicant is to be an alternate to a GNSO Councillor, he
> or she should have an understanding of how the Council works and have
> observed their meetings beforehand. They must provide a letter of
> recommendation from either the Chair of the NCSG Policy Committee or a
> serving member of the Council in his or her second term.
>
> b.
>
> a.
>
> You suggested that there should be a letter from the Finance Committee. I
> cannot accept that change. Remember we are talking about "alternate" to
> council member. Their task if they get the travel slot is to go to the
> meeting and go to council and policy meeting, has nothing to do with
> finance.
>
>
>
> I think the confusion comes from the fact the travel slots that we are
> talking in this travel policy is  the ICANN support of NCSG EC (3 slots)
> and NCSG Council member slots (6 slots). We will need a more elaborate
> travel policy later on for other funding allocation. but as it stands this
> will do.
>
>
>
> I made as many changes as I could and removed the paragraph about policy
> committee . but some changes I could not make as I said above.
>
>
>
> Here is the doc.
>
>
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sSJWajPGAIz9_mwNFiS7YlUg5CYtKdN5HejtaVojXo0/edit?ts=5b40a6ef#
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sSJWajPGAIz9_mwNFiS7YlUg5CYtKdN5HejtaVojXo0/edit?ts=5b40a6ef>
>
>
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 6:29 PM Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Farzaneh
>
>
>
> Apologies for the long email note.
>
>
>
> Like I said earlier, the essence is being deminished when you start laying
> emphasis on travel slot for a particular committee and leaving the other
> who is supposed to be conducting it's interface with ICANN.org and the
> community at large.
>
>
>
> Not because I got involved in Finance Committee, I have been to several
> ICANN meetings in past 10 years largely not on ICANN.org, outside that
> there is no part of the world I have not travelled to, so travel slot
> should not be my headache, but for  the mandate of the committee in the
> charter, which I browse through hitherto until this appointment, there is
> need to have stakeholder sessions, interface with ICANN.org, prospect
> funders and get feedback on fund already spent, new modalities among others
> and how best to evolve.
>
>
>
> it's important to ensure that the only two statutory committees of NCSG
> (FC and PC) have equal footing when it comes to providing enabling
> environment except if one decides to be mischievous, yet we expect equal
> results.
>
>
>
> We all must work as a larger team without deminishing any to make progress
> in NCSG especially on accountability and transparency.
>
>
>
> Personally I do not expect less from you as a leader of substance as far
> as NCSG is for now and anyone taking over thereafter.
>
>
>
> So I still stand on my demands madam chair.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Remmy Nweke
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 7 Jul 2018 10:36 pm, "farzaneh badii" <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Remmy,
>
>
>
> For three years  being in leadership positions at ICANN, out of 9 ICANN
> meetings I attended only 3. I was an executive committee member an ncuc
> chair and ncsg chair. I was effective and carried out my tasks well and did
> more than many of those who actually attended meetings. Even more than some
> of the previous chairs. I raised overall up to 88000 usd for ncuc and ncsg
> from Icann for policy writing and capacity building. I managed an outreach
> of 7000 usd which Icann paid as a crop event again from behind my desk at 3
> am in the morning sometimes. My decision as ncsg chair not to seek re
> election is of course because of not being able to travel but that is
> totally different. When you are at the helm of a group unfortunately
> because of this "leadership" culture of ICANN and hierarchy NCSG will
> sometimes be without representative which is not in its interest. But when
> you are with a committee in more of an executive function,  You don't have
> to attend ICANN meetings to do your job. If you get the opportunity to go
> then great. But you don't have to.
>
>
>
> I think all ncsg members should know that travel slots don't bring
> equality in participation. Participation brings participation and
> inclusiveness. Hard work brings results. The result of participation can be
> travel slots. It should not be vice versa.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 7, 2018 at 4:09 PM Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the response Farzaneh,
>
>
>
> I think it would amount to not wanting to make Finance Committee improve
> on its working processes and mandate to sound it off as mere “protecting
> the interest of members or wanting to score travel slot” which I think
> negates the purpose of the Finance Committee or probably why it has been in
> comatose lately.
>
>
>
> For your information, the role and mandate of Finance Committee as
> contained in the NCSG Charter Section 2.6 is very clear and is not limited
> to the following:
>
>
>
> Develop and deploy a fund raising plan for the NCSG;
>
>
>
> Work with the ICANN’s staff to determine levels of support available to
> the NCSG;
>
>
>
> Work with ICANN finance officers to insure the NCSG and its Constituencies
> receive fair and equivalent financial support from ICANN;
>
>
>
> Accounting for any funds received by the NCSG from any source. This
> accounting will include the following:
>
>
>
> All funds raised by voluntary membership fees or otherwise must be held in
> a separate NCSG account.
>
>
>
> Proper controls must be implemented.
>
>
>
> Regarding Expenditures, FC is to among others see that:
>
>
>
> Financial reports must be prepared annually and be made public.
>
> Provide internal conflict resolution process regarding funds.
>
> Provide the oversight of the Treasurer function.
>
>
>
> Fulfill any other accounting, auditing or other prescribed financial
> requirements as set by the ICANN Board of Directors for organizations
> within the ICANN structure.
>
>
>
> For now, the present crop of FC are not people who are merely seeking
> exposure, but want to contribute its quota, and thus find it unhealthy that
> Finance Committee is being relegated.
>
>
>
> Looking at most of the responsibilities of the Finance Committee, its
> stakeholders  and possible time for most of its functions and oversights
> must be dealt with within the ICANN stakeholdes meeting for proper
> engagement.
>
>
>
> Finally, its in the best interest of *NCSG-EC* that the Finance Committee
> work and works well, so as to pave way for more accountability and
> transparency in our process and overtly more funding for our stakeholders.
>
> We cannot be demanding accountability and transparency from other
> stakeholders and tactically frustrate the efforts of Finance Committee
> thereby making the committee look as irredeemables.
>
>
>
> Remmy
>
>
>
> --
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
> --
>
> Remmy Nweke, Esq lead strategist/group executive editor, DigitalSENSE
> Africa Media Ltd, publishers of: [DigitalSENSE Business News | ITRealms |
> NaijaAgroNet] Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza Bolade Junction,
> Oshodi, Lagos-Nigeria 234-8023122558, 8051000475, 08033592762, 08172004283
> Remmyn at gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180709/eb2150bf/attachment.htm>