[council] Discussion around face 2 face meetings

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,

There currently seems to be a trend towards more and more requests being made 
for ICANN resources to fund F2F meetings. This trend now seems to be spilling 
over into work teams that would previously have probably not made them but 
simply endeavored to complete their work through teleconference calls and email 
correspondence.

On a personal basis, I find this trend worrying as it places an undue financial 
burden on ICANN and is not, in my view, viable in the long term unless we 
accept that a) ICANN's budget needs to grow exponentially and without limits 
and b) that participation in work teams means making oneself available to 
travel (with the inherent tendency that follows for only those people whom 
either have lots of time to devote to the ICANN process will tend to 
participate).

However, I have not before approached this topic with the Council as I did not 
have concrete examples to provide. But a recent example has come to light, and 
I have been asked by the RrSG to forward the following message to the Council. 
This message comes from a member of PPSC WT who has asked that it be very 
clearly stated that this comment is not in any way meant as a criticism of Jeff 
Neuman, the chair of the group, whom has done an excellent job despite some 
difficult working conditions.

Message reads:

The PPSC PDP Work Team has proposed an ICANN-funded face-to-face meeting in 
Washington DC next year.  The RrSG objects to this proposal on the following 
grounds:

We are concerned about the potential for precedent this move would set for 
future PDPs struggling to meet the challenges of participation and schedule 
pressure.
       
We are concerned about an expansion of ICANN-funded travel, and the impact this 
will have on budgets & fees.  As such, we request that this (and any future)  
proposed meetings that call for ICANN funding be subject to a full vote of the 
Council, and are not decided unilaterally at the working-group level.
       
It is difficult to commit support, in advance, for any meeting that does not 
have a detailed & defined agenda.

And finally, we believe that an emphasis on face-to-face meetings (as opposed 
to remote teleconferences / webcasts) is a retreat from ICANN's mission of 
global participation and inclusion of interests outside the US.

Thanks,

Stéphane

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature