Hi



>
> Date:    Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:27:35 -0500
> From:    Edward Morris <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Intercessional Planning
>
>

>
>  I completely support your concept of alternating the intersessional
> meetings between ICANN's hub sites. I also think consideration should be
> given to porting  the intersessional on to either side of the GDD meeting,
> allowing perhaps for a day of overlap so we could meet with RySG and RrSG
> as well.
>
>  I disagree with you on Iceland for the current year. My goal is a meeting
> site where participants can get to fairly easily and with minimal time
> commitment. Reykjavik is 5 hours from the US east coast, 3 hours from major
> European cities, and has nonstop flights from the American west coast. That
> isn't good for our Asian, African or South American participants, but no
> city under consideration this year is (with discussion apparently revolving
> around North American and European locations). It's in the middle between
> North America and Europe and for budget travellers, if unfunded
> participants are allowed, it's a good location for both our North American
> and European members with two budget air carriers using Reykjavik as a hub.
>
>  However, as noted, I'd be happy to travel anywhere if it alleviated the
> visa issue for our visa challenged members. I see no reason to believe that
> Reykjavik would be more challenging for visas than any other location
> currently under consideration.
>
>  I wil note that I personally will be in Australia in February so although
> not visa challenged will have a long trip to Iceland if I am chosen to
> attend the meeting.
>
>
>
So if it is not good for 3 continents, why 2 pull the strings? (I know the
math is too simple here and this is probably a rethorical question).

+1 for rotating between ICANN hubs although this seems to be also a simple
idea at first but I have seen no plans, either from CSG or NCSG to do any
activities with ICANN and in Africa and on LAC

And I will, yes, draw the attention to LAC once more as it would be only
expected that some compensation of meetings from being crossed out of the
main calendar occurs (happened in other spaces in ICANN).

If not in the next intersessional, push for the others to happen there.
While I understand the need to articulate to GDD, I can hardly see them
opposing to a meeting in Casa de Internet ICANN hub in Montevideu, Uruguay.

And +1 for self-funded members attending as meetings in LAC would provide
this rare possibility for developing countries attendees

Also, the UN (on IGF website) is using intersessional

Best,

Renata