RE: [ga] Funding denied

[George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello,

--- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> this status. From ICANN's point of view, it is a mailing list of
> individuals
> that have an interest in internet matters. However, there might be

For the most part, the GA list is a cross constituency list that is
open to anybody. There are certainly registrars, registries, business
constituency members, non-commercial constituency, ALAC and probably
members of the ISP and IP participating and/or lurking on the list. And
even a few Board members read it (not that it has ever led them to vote
properly, but that's a different issue).

As such, there should never be direct funding for GA participants, as
it's more proper for them to pay their own way or to receive funding
from their constituency.

Imagine if ICANN had to pay the way for Jeff Williams' "134K members"
of "INEGroup"? :) ICANN's Budget would soar! Olympic-size stadiums
would be needed to hold meetings! Although, perhaps most of those
"members" would fit on the head of a pin, perhaps making travel costs
affordable... ;)

Troll jokes aside, perhaps this can be revisited in the future if/when
the 3 "super constituencies" of the LSE report come into being. At that
time it may be more appropriate to discuss what resources each of those
3 constituencies would have to assist its representatives from
attending. However, in my opinion it would be better to pick locations
that are cheaper for visitors to attend, and spending some resources on
remote participation (WebEx, or other group conferencing with video).
That might be the best of all possible worlds.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/