Hi Ayden,

Thanks for the question,
I cannot speak for most of those choices and I don't really recall who made
them (at least Stockholm was made by Business Constituency chair and
Portugal by IPC chair).

as I did before, I suggested Tokyo since we would like to have the meeting
outside of US, and having a location that can be accepted by the CSG as
compromise:

- Tokyo has 2 international airports with many daily direct flights by
several airlines to major cities in North America (such as NY, LA, SF,
Washington DC, toronto, Vancouver), Europe and APAC. still accessible for
Africa via Dubai/Qatar/Istanbul hub (I use them myself when I go back home
to Tunis)
- Tokyo has appropriate facilities to hold meetings. In fact ICANN
organized twice the regional meetings here for the contracted parties and
so the ICANN meeting team is familiar with it.
It is also possible to get local support for meeting facility from some
organizations for example JPNIC etc . there is also some staff in Tokyo
while in limited number and the ICANN staff in Singapore can help and
support easily. there are also different options for accommodations.
- I rarely heard about someone having issue related to visa to Japan, and
my understanding is that the process is pretty straightforward.

hope that explains the rationale behind my suggestion.

Best,

Rafik





2016-12-01 4:02 GMT+09:00 Ayden Férdeline <[log in to unmask]>:

> So I have just been reviewing the transcript from the call on the 29th,
> and I am going to copy and paste the exotic litany of cities that were
> suggested for this intersessional:
>
> "Reykjavík, Stockholm, Nice, Portugal, Spain, Barcelona, Azores, Bermuda,
> Cape Verde Islands, South Georgia island, Tokyo, Hobart, Nu'uk, Edinburgh
> or Glasgow, London, Cardiff, Wales"
>
> The Azores, really? I spent four days in Ponta Delgada last year and
> beautiful as it may be, the island only has intermittent Internet access,
> so remote participation would be out of the question. It also does not have
> daily flights, except to Lisbon, and we have no active community members in
> the vicinity. Is this really the most sensible location to suggest?
>
> I continue to maintain it is a waste of resources to the extreme to debate
> rotating this meeting, which is not public facing and is not for outreach,
> between anything other than ICANN hubs.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Ayden Férdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: NCPH Intersessional timing
> Local Time: 29 November 2016 8:17 AM
> UTC Time: 29 November 2016 08:17
> From: [log in to unmask]
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> https://www.mobileworldcongress.com/
>
> MWC is 27 Feb - 2 March.
>
> -James
>
>
>
>
> On 29/11/2016, 08:06, "NCSG-Discuss on behalf of Milan, Stefania" <
> [log in to unmask] on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >Was RightsCon mentioned already? March 29-31
> >
> >
> >________________________________________
> >Da: NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]> per conto di Tapani
> Tarvainen <[log in to unmask]>
> >Inviato: martedì 29 novembre 2016 08.24.23
> >A: [log in to unmask]
> >Oggetto: Re: NCPH Intersessional timing
> >
> >Thank you Stephanie and Ines.
> >
> >That makes it clear enough that February is our first choice.
> >
> >As for the potential conflicts, I got nothing absolute (as in, "I will
> >definitely be going there") but a few potential ("may go") conflicts
> >for April/May:
> >
> >Russian IGF, April 7-10
> >Internet 2: Global Summit, Washington DC April 23-26
> >IOT Forum, Madrid April 26
> >RIPE meeting, Budapest May 8-12
> >
> >Some people also pointed out that Easter is in mid-April and would
> >in effect make 13-17 April inpractical.
> >
> >Nobody has as yet offered any specific ICANN/IG events in August-September
> >timeframe, but the beginning of academic year impedes several people then.
> >
> >If you have other potential conflicts in mind, please let me know ASAP.
> >
> >Tapani
> >
> >On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 09:23:53PM -0500, hfaiedh ines (
> [log in to unmask]) wrote:
> >
> >> I vote February, sorry for missing the vote.
> >>
> >> 2016-11-28 17:53 GMT-05:00 Stephanie Perrin <
> >> [log in to unmask]>:
> >>
> >> > I apologise for not voting....no internet access. I vote February.
> >> > Stephanie
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone on the Bell network.
> >> > Original Message
> >> > From: Tapani Tarvainen
> >> > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 2:43 AM
> >> > To: [log in to unmask]
> >> > Reply To: Tapani Tarvainen
> >> > Subject: NCPH Intersessional timing
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Dear all,
> >> >
> >> > Poll results from the intersessional timing options were,
> unfortunately
> >> > but not unexpectedly, not conclusive. The choices could have been
> better
> >> > phrased - some people emailed me offlist about that - but time was
> short.
> >> >
> >> > As it is, only 1 (can't make it) was clearly defined, the rest were
> >> > basically just a scale of preferability, and so averaging them out
> >> > makes at least some sense.
> >> >
> >> > Here's a summary of results, for each category and month averages
> >> > (excluding "no opinion" ones) and in parentheses the number of "can't
> >> > make it" choices:
> >> >
> >> > count category Feb Apr-May Aug-Sep
> >> > 4 Councillors 3.7(1) 2.7(1) 2.0(2)
> >> > 3 NCSG EC 3.7(1) 3.5(0) 2.0(0)
> >> > 1 NCSG PC 5.0(0) 2.0(0) 3.0(0)
> >> > 4 NCUC EC 4.8(0) 3.0(1) 3.5(0)
> >> > 2 NPOC EC 4.5(0) 3.5(0) 4.0(0)
> >> > 10 Other 3.3(2) 4.1(1) 3.7(2)
> >> >
> >> > 14 All except "Other" 4.2(2) 3.1(2) 3.4(2)
> >> > 24 All 3.9(4) 3.5(3) 3.5(4)
> >> >
> >> > My conclusion is that there's no really strong preference to any,
> >> > but February is slightly preferred (especially if we give less
> >> > weight to "Other" category, who are less likely to participate).
> >> >
> >> > A couple of people commented that the latter two choices, but
> >> > especially April/May, would depend a lot on the exact date:
> >> > there're lots of other meetings and events people will be
> >> > participating in that timeframe.
> >> >
> >> > The time should be decided tomorrow. Before that, we should try to
> >> > answer the questions posed by Tony Holmes below.
> >> >
> >> > For the first one I guess we can answer "no": none of the times impose
> >> > severe constraints for us, even though all of them are bad for at
> >> > least two council/EC members.
> >> >
> >> > For question 4 it's not clear-cut, but given the poll results
> >> > I'd suggest order would be (1) Feb (2) Aug-Sep (3) Apr-May
> >> > (the latter two decided by non-Other category).
> >> >
> >> > For questions 2 and 3 I'd like to ask you all what other
> >> > ICANN/IGF-related events you may be participating in the
> >> > timeframes given (to reduce clutter on the list you can
> >> > send them just to me and I'll summarize them here).
> >> >
> >> > Tapani
> >> >
> >> > ----- Forwarded message from tonyarholmes <
> [log in to unmask]>
> >> > -----
> >> >
> >> > Rob/All
> >> >
> >> > We agreed we will try and nail the date for the next intercessional
> during
> >> > a
> >> > 30 minute call next week.
> >> >
> >> > To try and avert what Klaus described as 'going around in circles',
> perhaps
> >> > the following approach could help narrow the options prior to that
> call.
> >> >
> >> > It appeared that the possibility of tagging an intercessional on to
> the
> >> > front or end of the Copenhagen or Johannesburg meetings was dismissed,
> >> > which
> >> > left us with 3 options on the table at the end of the call;
> >> >
> >> > - Week beginning February 13th
> >> >
> >> > - Late April/beginning of May
> >> >
> >> > - Beyond Johannesburg (effectively late Aug/early Sept)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Suggest as representatives from our respective groups, in advance of
> the
> >> > call we try and respond to Rob on the following questions;
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 1. Do any of those options impose severe constraints on the ability
> >> > of
> >> > your members to attend? If so, what are they and can they be overcome?
> >> >
> >> > 2. During the suggested time frame for late April/beginning of May
> >> > are
> >> > there major conflicts due to other Internet Governance, Regional,
> standards
> >> > bodies, trade association, other, meetings? If so what are they and
> when
> >> > will they take place?
> >> >
> >> > 3. Beyond Johannesburg, late Aug/early Sept, are there major
> >> > conflicts due to other Internet Governance, Regional, standards
> bodies,
> >> > trade association, other meetings? If so what are they and when will
> they
> >> > take place?
> >> >
> >> > 4. Can you rank the 3 options on the table in order of preference.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > If it proves possible to do this it may help focus thoughts during
> our 30
> >> > minute call. Just a suggestion.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > Tony
> >> >
> >> > ----- End forwarded message -----
> >> >
> >
> >The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution,
> forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this
> information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is
> prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received
> this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer.
>
>
>