[NCSG-FC] NCSG Additional Budget Request (ABR) Form - Invitation to edit

farzaneh badii farzaneh.badii at gmail.com
Sat Jan 12 20:37:41 EET 2019 

Honestly, sometimes members don't even comment.

Maryam was a big help last year so if you can throw out some ideas on the
mailing list, I am sure she can help with drafting and fill in the forms.


Farzaneh


On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 1:31 PM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks Farzi, I think we are trying to follow the same ad hoc process that
> was conducted in the past year. I will send the form to both lists now in
> order to ease the process.
>
> Remmy, re. what you said I think we have a problem. While we are in need
> of volunteers to help draft the ABRs and even get some ideas around (if you
> had any you could help us by sharing them on the list), the Finance
> Committee is basically saying this is not their job to do - while writing
> ABRs is something we are trying to do on behalf of and for the stakeholder
> group and its constituencies.
>
> I believe that in order to fully oversee the implementation of our
> requests - if we manage to get any of them out - the FC would need to
> actually know them, as well as the submission process. By that we could do
> a proper follow up of what worked and what didnt. And imho, helping us
> draft them would be a way of getting the FC actually involved in the
> process.
>
> Last but not least, I dont agre that anyone here is trying to micromanage
> anyone. We are trying to actually put an ABR proposal forward and continue
> to work for the constituencies. Such accusations do nothing but expose our
> work. If after reading this email you continue to think asking the FC to
> help us draft ABRs is an attempt of micromanaging, consider helping us
> without your FC Hat and simply as constituency member - and if your other
> volunteering work keeps you from doing so it is also fine. (I myself have
> taken a few break from reading the Geonames public comment due to the ABRs)
>
> Em sáb, 12 de jan de 2019 às 16:29, Stephanie Perrin <
> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> escreveu:
>
>> Thanks Farzi.  I am sorry that we are so last minute.  I should have
>> pushed this a while ago....
>>
>> However, we still have time to come up with some good ABRs.  We don't
>> need a doxen....we just need solid proposals that, as Farzi has said, the
>> organization will have a hard time refusing.
>>
>> cheers Stephanie
>> On 2019-01-12 13:22, farzaneh badii wrote:
>>
>> Hi Steph
>>
>> Here is an ad hoc process I as NCUC and NCSG chair. I consulted with
>> ICANN staff as well as NCSG  members and NCUC members  for ABRs, looked
>> over what was accepted in other stakeholder groups and constituencies (that
>> makes it hard to say no to us) consider priorities of NCSG and Cs and
>> members comments. FC was not active at the time so I sent it to NCSG EC.
>> NCSG EC does not check NCSG mailing list regularly so it's better to share
>> with them whatever you share with the mailing list in advance so that they
>> don't consider it as a late submission.
>>
>> Here is the Google doc of ABRs last year:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PpgItPf9siL-HnkuyDICL73y1NTg7B2UpmlKhk67CZU/edit
>>
>> But since we don't really have time I guess you can just wing it by using
>> the Google Doc form and sending it to the mailing list.
>>
>> I personally think FC should have nothing to do with how Cs submit their
>> ABRs. They can suggest something but not impose.
>>
>>
>> Farzaneh
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 1:04 PM Stephanie Perrin <
>> stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> I would like to back Bruna up here.  Guys, we have to focus on
>>> substance.  So far, nobody has  a draft ABR that is circulating for
>>> comments.  Bruna and I should not have to do this ourselves.  I know that
>>> Farzi wound up drafting ABRs last year, at the last minute.  Bruna and I
>>> are now doing the same.
>>>
>>> Process is important, but it does not replace substance. Let's get some
>>> projets going, people.  After Monday, you will have a whole year to work on
>>> the forms.
>>>
>>> Cheers Stephanie
>>> On 2019-01-12 11:26, Bruna Martins dos Santos wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Remmy,
>>>
>>> I do agree that the FC has to work together with the Leadership teams in
>>> both constituencies and I mentioned to Thato in a call we had this week
>>> that NCUC EC is here to support him in all possible ways. But just so we
>>> can work together, I believe that communication is key - that meaning we
>>> could have a closer conversation between the FC, the NCUC EC and the
>>> constituency.
>>>
>>> At the same time, Remmy, I hope I am misinterpretating
>>> <https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=misinterpretating> your
>>> email as I did not appreciate the tone of it, as well as your attempt to
>>> challenge a decision taken by the NCUC Executive Committee.  As explained,
>>> we very much appreciate the FC work and do want to work together to the
>>> committee, but we did not find it feasible to adopt the proposed form given
>>> that the ABRs deadline is coming in less than 3 days. By adopting the
>>> proposed form now we would have to have an extra amount of work in reading
>>> through the suggestions, selecting which ones we are submitting and then
>>> starting to draft the actual ABR form. Today is the 12th of January and the
>>> deadline for ABRs submission, as you may know, is the 15th - therefore the
>>> FC suggestion was not adopted this year in order to avoid adding another
>>> layer of work in the ABRs submission when we really dont have time for
>>> that.
>>>
>>> With regards to your comment on transparency, you might have seen my
>>> email to the NCUC list asking for ABRs suggestions and volunteers to draft
>>> it. While I think this is something that the FC could be onboard I am not
>>> going to take the time to ask why neither of you volunteered to draft
>>> anything or sent us any suggestion yet, because I do think we have to work
>>> together and I dont believe that picking fights with each other will help
>>> us achieving anything here. But, Remmy, as soon as NCUC submits its ABRs,
>>> they will be shared on the list - I might even be able to do it before the
>>> deadline just so we have time for corrections and community comments. I do
>>> believe that the deadline is not ideal, but we are all volunteers here and
>>> I am working with and how I can, and I do believe that the FC is doing the
>>> same.
>>>
>>> Having said that, can we count with any of the FC members help in
>>> drafting ABRs ?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> bruna
>>>
>>> Em sáb, 12 de jan de 2019 às 07:40, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com>
>>> escreveu:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Bruna
>>>> Giving the foregoing and latent position of NCUC to an attempt to
>>>> enhance process, I think it's important for FC representatives to be
>>>> included in their constituency Excom to enable them work in line and in
>>>> alignment with the C's rather than across purposes.
>>>>
>>>> For instance, there is no clear reason for the non adoption or comment
>>>> to improve it which was initiated due to the call by NCSG chair, and to
>>>> help in collation of ABR afterwards, thus the NCUC decline is already
>>>> counter productive to transparency and accountability effort by FC.
>>>>
>>>> But take it that FC reps are part of Excom it will afford FC to have
>>>> sufficient background to the decline and come up with more acceptable
>>>> concept.
>>>>
>>>> In fact it seems we have three C's - NPOC, NCUC and FC under NCSG.
>>>> Until we revisit this honestly not much progress will be made as we
>>>> continue to fall short of ICANN processes of genuine transparency and
>>>> accountability in our folds.
>>>>
>>>> Happy weekend everyone as we ponder.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 11 Jan 2019, 7:44 p.m. Bruna Martins dos Santos <
>>>> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>
>>>>> NCUC EC Discussed it on our call yesterday and we decided that
>>>>> adopting the form is not an optimal solution for now.
>>>>>
>>>>> Although we very much appreciate the FC work and the idea of coming up
>>>>> with a mechanism to make our lives easier, in light of the short timeframe
>>>>> NCUC might not be able to adopt it now. Hopefully we will have the chance
>>>>> to enhance the proposed form for next year's ABRs process, and with the
>>>>> appropriate timeframe.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you very much.
>>>>>
>>>>> best,
>>>>> Bruna
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Em sex, 11 de jan de 2019 às 10:56, Thato Mfikwe <
>>>>> thatomfikwe at gmail.com> escreveu:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just a friendly reminder that the ABR form need to be circulated
>>>>>> today, please make your input since we have very limited time to meet the
>>>>>> deadline.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should there be no comments by 10pm UTC, Iit will be considered and
>>>>>> taken that everyone is okay with the structure and extend of data
>>>>>> collected, thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thato Mfikwe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, January 9, 2019, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good day
>>>>>>> This is the draft template for the ABR to help us coordinate the
>>>>>>> process.
>>>>>>> Kindly review and let's have your comments before it's shared on
>>>>>>> NCSG list on or before Friday.
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Remmy Nweke
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
>>>>>>> From: Remmy Nweke (via Google Forms) <remmyn at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019, 5:27 p.m.
>>>>>>> Subject: NCSG Additional Budget Request (ABR) Form - Invitation to
>>>>>>> edit
>>>>>>> To: <remmyn at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: <thatomfikwe at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> has invited you to *edit* the
>>>>>>> following form:
>>>>>>> NCSG Additional Budget Request (ABR) Form
>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1YV0dz666KqgF1Hhudno-S4045Y7c1-X0ktVwrwEa_zQ/edit?usp=sharing_eil&ts=5c34cf75>
>>>>>>> Open in Forms
>>>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1YV0dz666KqgF1Hhudno-S4045Y7c1-X0ktVwrwEa_zQ/edit?usp=sharing_eip&ts=5c34cf75>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a courtesy copy of an email for your record only. It's not
>>>>>>> the same email your collaborators received. Click here
>>>>>>> <https://support.google.com/drive/?p=courtesy_copy> to learn more. [image:
>>>>>>> Logo for Google Forms] <https://drive.google.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>>>
>>>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>>>> @boomartins
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> NCSG-FC mailing list
>>>>> NCSG-FC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-fc
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> NCSG-FC mailing list
>>>> NCSG-FC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-fc
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>>
>>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>>> @boomartins
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>
> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
> @boomartins
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-fc/attachments/20190112/c47eb497/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the NCSG-FC mailing list