[NCSG-FC] ICANN 59 Meeting

[Tapani Tarvainen]

Agreed.

Tapani

On Jun 22 10:16, Sam Lanfranco (lanfran at yorku.ca) wrote:
> 
> All,
> 
> Sadly I cannot be there, so I support Ed's position:
> 
> /"....we should either go in that direction (and I'll try to discover on the
> weekend whether there is interest in participating on the part of other GNSO
> parties) or we should cancel the meeting all together."
> 
> /Hopefully we will have made substantial progress so that by ICANN 60 we can
> deal with substantive issues and opportunities.
> 
> All the best to the assembled crew.
> 
> Sam L.
> 
> On 6/22/2017 9:55 AM, Edward Morris wrote:
> > Hello,
> > As everyone is aware, the NCSG Finance Committee has a 90 minute meeting
> > slot reserved at ICANN 59 in Johannesburg. We are scheduled to meet
> > between 10:30 and noon local time. On our last call we began to discuss
> > what to do with this meeting slot but we ran out of time to complete the
> > discussion.
> > I see no reason to use this slot for a regular FC meeting. The following
> > played a role in this evaluation:
> > 1. We just had a 90 minute meeting covering all of the pertinent items
> > before us. The action items from the 20 June meeting will not be
> > completed before 27 June.
> > 2. FC member Sam Lanfranco will not be in Johannesburg and the time
> > difference would make this remote participation problematic.
> > I don't like meeting for the sake of meeting. I am very cognisant that
> > we are all volunteers here and I don't want to needlessly take anyone's
> > time. I don't see any need for a meeting on the 27th. Of note, I do plan
> > on asking ICANN Finance to send a member to attend our next call
> > post-ICANN 59 to respond to items that came up on our call of 20 June.
> > During our last call, I proposed to use the slot, provided I could get
> > buy in from other parties, to bring together our colleagues in the GNSO
> > with NC (NCSG, NCUC, NPOC)  FC and EC members who are in South Africa to
> > discuss the GNSO approach to the budget. The Empowered Community places
> > community responsibility for budgetary matters in the SO and not in the
> > SG or C's. While ALAC and the CCNSO, for example, provide unified
> > comments to Finance on budgetary matters, the GNSO provides multiple
> > comments from the SG's, C's and Council. It's my belief that this
> > weakens all of us in the GNSO in intracommunity budgetary deliberations.
> > It would be my hope that coming together we might be able to figure a
> > way to work together to strengthen all of our budgetary proposals.
> > In my view we should either go in that direction (and I'll try to
> > discover on the weekend whether there is interest in participating on
> > the part of other GNSO parties) or we should cancel the meeting all
> > together.
> > I'll wait to hear from the other FC members before doing anything further.
> > Kind Regards,
> > Edward Morris
> > 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------
> "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured
> in an unjust state" -Confucius
>  邦有道，贫且贱焉，耻也。邦无道，富且贵焉，耻也
> ------------------------------------------------
> Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar)
> Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3
> email: Lanfran at Yorku.ca   Skype: slanfranco
> blog:  https://samlanfranco.blogspot.com
> Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852
>