[PC-NCSG] Intersessional

[Tapani Tarvainen]

On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 03:39:30PM +0900, Rafik Dammak (rafik.dammak at gmail.com) wrote:

> > No alternative is really good for everybody (or even anybody),
> > we just need to agree on the least bad compromise.

> if we are equally unsatisfied it would be ok but that is not the
> case currently.

That is never the case. Some will always be less satisfied.
We can only hope it'll even out in the long run.

> also April/May is an option that we can consider.

Of course. We are doing it right now. But I've seen no good
arguments in its favour. Do you have some?

> > * Too much total travel time.

> the point is not just about the travel itself which depends of the location
> but the fact that is 4 or 5 extra days in addition to ICANN meetings. the
> goal is to reduce the burden here.

Agreed on the goal, but still I don't see how any of the choices
on the table now would be any better in that respect.

> > * Too little time to prepare. Given that we've had all year to prepare
> > but haven't gotten any closer, I don't expect more time would help -
> > people simply won't start doing much until the meeting is closer
> > anyway, and two months really should be enough.

> with holidays in the middle for many here.

I already allowed for that in the calculation: If we can make the
decision on Tuesday to have the meeting on the week of Feb 13, it's
two and a half months away. Assume holidays take two weeks of it and
there's still two full months to prepare.

> > * Visa problems. As far as I can see, they would not get any easier
> > later, more likely worse as the time between meetings will be shorter.
> > And it may be possible to apply for visa to Denmark and Iceland at the
> > same time (Denmark handles Iceland visas applications in many places),
> > while that definitely doesn't isn't the case with South Africa.

> that is assuming Iceland is the location and that is not something agreed
> yet . so the issue of visas applications will remain open .

Nothing is agreed on yet.

If Reykjavik turns out to be impossible it takes the latter point away, true,
but all indications are Reykjavik would be possible and acceptable to most.

> I am really taking this as matter of principle because the burden of
> visa issues is always for the same folks and we have to mindful
> about this.

I absolutely agree we need to take a strong stand on the visa issue.

But is there some reason I've missed to believe it would be less of a
problem later on?

> > * Scheduling conflicts. Again, mid-February seems to be the best
> > compromise, April and August are much busier for most people.

> April/May still in table.

Yes. Any arguments in its favour?

> mid-february is just 3 weeks before ICANN meeting in Copenhagen. it
> is too close.

If the intersessional is used at least in part preparing Copenhagen,
relatively short gap between them may even be a good thing.

> Can we find consensus here? Would a straw poll or the like help?

> fine with polling.

A 3x3-way poll perhaps: the three date options and for each
"works for me / could go but wouldn't like / couldn't go at all"?

-- 
Tapani Tarvainen