<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] RE: ICANN Travel Support for 1 additional GNSO attendee to LA Meeting of CCWG - 25 & 26 September
- To: jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [council] RE: ICANN Travel Support for 1 additional GNSO attendee to LA Meeting of CCWG - 25 & 26 September
- From: Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez <crg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:08:28 -0600
- Cc: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <007201d0f09c$d1437d90$73ca78b0$@afilias.info>
- List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- References: <028501d0f07e$0352fbe0$09f8f3a0$@afilias.info> <007201d0f09c$d1437d90$73ca78b0$@afilias.info>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Dear Jonathan,
fair enough.
My motivation was not based on accumulated hours spent in calls, but in the
possibility of a broader discussion with the Board and the drafting changes
suggested by ira Magaziner.
I accept the clear and transparent rules proposed fully.
I wait for the results of the LA meeting to continue contributing.
I rest my case
Many thanks
.
Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez
_____________________
email: crg@xxxxxxxxxxx
Skype: carlos.raulg
+506 8837 7173 (cel)
+506 4000 2000 (home)
+506 2290 3678 (fax)
_____________________
Apartado 1571-1000
San Jose, COSTA RICA
> On Sep 16, 2015, at 10:29 AM, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> An update. I understand that there is more than one expression of interest
> from GNSO participants in the CCWG.
>
> It strikes me that we cannot evaluate these on subjective criteria e.g. a
> motivation statement from the candidate.
>
> One (and perhaps the only) objective criterion that we could apply is
> participation in the CCWG to date. Logs of participation are recorded and so
> we have the data.
> I propose to the Council that we do this and use the data to make an
> objective selection.
>
> https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Attendance+Log+CCWG-Accountability
>
> <https://community.icann.org/display/acctcrosscomm/Attendance+Log+CCWG-Accountability>
>
> Since the GNSO participant will necessarily be from only one SG or
> Constituency, it seems reasonable to me that we impress on the selected
> participant / attendee that they take a broad GNSO perspective during the
> course of their participation in LA.
> Further, that they remain receptive to input from other GNSO participants, as
> far as possible.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>
> From: Jonathan Robinson [mailto:jrobinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: 16 September 2015 13:49
> To: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: ICANN Travel Support for 1 additional GNSO attendee to LA Meeting of
> CCWG - 25 & 26 September
>
> All,
>
> ICANN has offered to support one traveller per chartering organisation in
> addition to the currently sponsored travel slots (primarily for members of
> the CCWG).
>
> We do not have a simple process or mechanism to deal with this, especially in
> such a tight time frame.
>
> Currently, Carlos (a GNSO Council member and participant in the CCWG) has
> volunteered to attend and take up this option.
> Accordingly, please be aware of this offer and communicate any objections or
> concerns you may have.
>
> Also, if you are aware of an active CCWG participant from within your SG who
> could make effective (for the benefit of the GNSO) use of such funding,
> please check their availability and make the name known.
>
> If more than one candidate emerges, we may need to undertake some form of
> vote.
>
> Thanks
>
>
> Jonathan
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|