[NCSG-PC] [Draft] Proposed NCSG Comment on the FY19 Budget

Fri Feb 9 14:03:30 EET 2018

Thank you for the comments, Arsène.

I have a feeling that the proposed NCSG comment on the FY19 Budget might still be incomplete, so would welcome suggestions from others - particularly those tracking closely the various working groups - if they feel like there are line items missing in the budget itself related to, say, implementation work or education campaigns. I don't track all the various working groups, subtracks, and work stream 2 activities closely enough to be able to make that assessment so am relying on you to inform me if something is missing please.

I am also wondering about earmarked capital like the New gTLD Auction Proceeds Fund and the Reserve Fund and how their investments are being managed (however this is far from my area of expertise, so I cannot say if their returns are excellent/average/terrible). Please feel free to edit the document to expand on this or other points if you have the knowledge, advice, analysis... thanks!

Best wishes,

Ayden

-------- Original Message --------
On 9 February 2018 10:17 AM, Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma at gmail.com> wrote:

> Good job Ayden and everyone for such a well done job. I think so far, all looks good to me, the comment reads well and captures many aspects that we care for. I will use suggest mode when i have edits to suggest.
>
> I have the impression that our public comments are more and more of good learning materials that we should widely share with our members. Not everyone is able to understand the issues (especially for those not ‘yet’ directly involved in pdps) but public comments can give to them an opportunity to understand them throug a public comment and know what we stand for.
>
> I therefore would encourage our PC Chair and SG/C chairs to find a way for our (submitted) public comments to be regularly shared with the community.
>
> Thanks,
> Arsene
> -----------------
> Arsène Tungali,
> about.me/ArseneTungali
> +243 993810967
> GPG: 523644A0
> Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
>
> Sent from my iPhone (excuse typos)
>
> On Feb 9, 2018, at 9:07 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ayden,
>>
>> thanks for the draft which is coming at a good time and allow us to work on it without pressure,
>> about the intercessional which is a separate topic not necessarily related to the budget, I am for an evaluation and assessment. I am not that convinced that issues were a matter of planning. The content is almost the same every year, just with small changes of few topics. I think after 5 years or more, it is a good time to review and think about improvement. I believe our CSG friends will be open and welcome that. Organizing it every other year can provide that opportunity and possibility for real change.
>>
>> I will review the budget and add my comments there.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Rafik
>>
>> 2018-02-09 6:21 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <icann at ferdeline.com>:
>>
>>> I think this year's Intersessional was unsuccessful, partially because of insufficient planning on our part, as well as the wrong delegates being in attendance. But I do think the concept itself is a good one and one which should continue. I am happy to remove this paragraph from the document altogether, however, if we do not have a common agreement on their value. I don't think it ranks among our most pressing concerns!
>>> Ayden
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> On 8 February 2018 10:14 PM, Dr. Tatiana Tropina <t.tropina at mpicc.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am one of those who questions the value of the intersessionals.
>>>>
>>>> I won't support continuing them every year. Every other year is a compromise I can accept.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Tanya
>>>>
>>>> On 08/02/18 20:14, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ayden
>>>>>
>>>>> I’ve had a chance to read your comments and congratulate you on doing so much work to go through the budget and prepare an intelligent evaluation of it.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with most of the comments but propose a few minor amendments here and there, which I will put onto the Google doc using suggest mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only point of disagreement is #17 your support for continued intersessionals. I don’t think there is consensus on that and in fact after the last one I heard several people who supported them question their value or frequency. A good middle ground might be to have them once every other year.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, I’ll enter my comments on the doc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>>>>>
>>>>> Professor, [School of Public Policy](http://spp.gatech.edu/)
>>>>>
>>>>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>>>>>
>>>>> Internet Governance Project
>>>>>
>>>>> http://internetgovernance.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Ayden Férdeline [mailto:icann at ferdeline.com]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 8, 2018 7:27 AM
>>>>> To: ncsg-pc [<ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is>](mailto:ncsg-pc at lists.ncsg.is); Mueller, Milton L [<milton at gatech.edu>](mailto:milton at gatech.edu); crg at ISOC-CR.ORG; paul.rosenzweig at REDBRANCHCONSULTING.COM; Corinne Cath [<corinnecath at gmail.com>](mailto:corinnecath at gmail.com)
>>>>> Subject: [Draft] Proposed NCSG Comment on the FY19 Budget
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have prepared a first draft of a proposed NCSG comment on the FY19 budget. This took quite some time to comb through, and I might have missed some things. So before I share this comment on the main discussion list and face the inevitable wrath of criticism and dislike, I thought I might share it here to get some initial feedback. I have also cc'd in a few other people who might not be on this mailing list but who I think might be able to offer some constructive edits on its contents:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tBia4z5QQFGz9vFUQUkS0lbZNqU6C5n4pyUmlH3m8e8/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks for your help,
>>>>>
>>>>> Ayden
>>>>>
>>>>> P.S. Carlos, if one sentence looks familiar, it's because I copied and pasted it from an email you sent to the NCSG list last year re: our Reserve Fund comment. I hope this is okay. Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> ______________________________
>>>>>
>>>>> _________________
>>>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>>>>
>>>>> [https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/
>>>>>
>>>>> listinfo/ncsg-pc](https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NCSG-PC mailing list
>> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
>> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20180209/6d1fd55a/attachment.htm>