[NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on ICANN Budget

[Ayden Férdeline]

Hi Ed,

Thanks for your email. I was just about to send something to this list along similar lines. It is true that the current draft comment has a negative tone, and it is not in final format where I would feel comfortable submitting it. It is really just a few bullet points that I put together that were intended as a starting point for others to draw off of. A conversation starter, if you will. Sadly that did not happen, and I agree that we cannot submit the present document as the NCSG's comment on the budgetary process. With the deadline for comments on the budget closing in several hours time, regretfully it does not seem likely to me that we will be able to submit something as the NCSG.

Best wishes,

Ayden

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [NCSG-PC] NCSG Comment on ICANN Budget
Local Time: 28 April 2017 4:00 PM
UTC Time: 28 April 2017 15:00
From: egmorris1 at toast.net
To: ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is

Hi Rafik,

I’d like to thank those who stepped in to contribute to the budget comment. I sadly disagree with the tone and much of the content of the document. I do not endorse it.

There was no way for me to edit the document without completely deleting much of what had previously been written there. I just didn’t feel that was an appropriate thing to do.

Rather I have completed and submitted to the Comments Forum a Personal Comment, which I am attaching to this post. I welcome those who have stepped up to do the NCSG comment to consider what I had to say, borrow from my post, or disregard it completely.

My objection to the NCSG comment as written consists of the following objections:

1. I believe it is too negative and accusatory and fails to recognize the hard work done by Finance and the unique nature of the first year of the Empowered Community.

I have major problems with the process, and have expressed them in my Comment, along with suggested ways of improving cooperation and community input. However, I don’t believe any slights were deliberate or intentional. I believe the Community, including myself, erred in placing so many hard deadlines on Finance as part of the budget process in the new Bylaws. This is a year of adaptation but generalized critical comments without specific proposed solutions serve no purpose. And that is what much of the proposed NCSG comment consists of.

2. I find the objections to ALAC expenditures to appear as a stand alone attack on the AC. There are a number of areas of expenditure that many of us would find questionable. Why focus only on these in the absence of criticism of other questionable expenses?

3. I don’t find staff retreats to be among the most pressing fiscal matters. After all, as a supplemental request components of the NCSG asked for their own retreats and the GNSO Council was actually granted one. Should we not first oppose these retreats or is there a reason staff retreats are so onerous?

4. As noted in my personal comment, my biggest concern involves the lack of funding priority for core policy activities. I have focused on one unfunded proposal – that of $100,000 for external PDP support – and would encourage the NCSG to consider adopting this view.

Although I can not endorse the comment, out of respect for the work done on the document I will not oppose it. I will abstain and hope my comments above as well as those in my personal comment will be considered by the PC.

Regrettably, I have some domestic responsibilities to attend to this evening that must take priority over my volunteer activities here. Consider my abstention to be a permament one and feel free to borrow from, or ignore, my offerings on this matter.

Best,

Ed Morris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20170428/ad1b7e95/attachment.htm>