RE: [council] names council teleconference thurdsay 21 september

[R.Gaetano@iaea.org]

$10K is probably an upper limit figure.
I wonder whether a Webcast in the US will not be cheaper than in Japan.
RG

> -----Original Message-----
> From: erica.roberts [mailto:erica.roberts@telstra.com]
> Sent: Saturday, 23 September 2000 22:52
> To: Ken Stubbs; Paul M. Kane; YJ Park
> Cc: mclaughlin@pobox.com; Dany Vandromme; Elisabeth PORTENEUVE; John
> Crain; Louis Touton; Mike Roberts; names council; GAETANO, Roberto
> Subject: RE: [council] names council teleconference thurdsay 21
> september
> 
> 
> As you may recall, M-IT paid for the last NC meeting web 
> cast.  The cost was 
> $US10,000.
> 
> erica
> 
> >===== Original Message From "Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@revenue.com> =====
> >cant be done that day as icann staff & key board members are 
> meeting with
> >cctld administrators in late afternoon. this is why the 
> schedule has been
> >compressed to the times i proposed
> >
> >ken
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "YJ Park" <yjpark@myepark.com>
> >To: "Paul M. Kane" <Paul.Kane@reacto.com>
> >Cc: <mclaughlin@pobox.com>; "Ken Stubbs" 
> <kstubbs@corenic.org>; "Elisabeth
> >PORTENEUVE" <Elisabeth.PORTENEUVE@cetp.ipsl.fr>; "Dany Vandromme"
> ><vandrome@renater.fr>; "Louis Touton" <touton@icann.org>; 
> "names council"
> ><council@dnso.org>; "roberto gaetano" <R.Gaetano@iaea.org>; 
> "Mike Roberts"
> ><mmr@darwin.ptvy.ca.us>; "John Crain" <crain@icann.org>
> >Sent: Saturday, September 23, 2000 9:19 AM
> >Subject: Re: [council] names council teleconference thurdsay 
> 21 september
> >
> >
> >> Hello Paul and all,
> >>
> >> It appears things move here.:-)
> >> Thanks a lot, Ken and Paul.
> >>
> >> > We need a costing and I have asked John Crain for the 
> price for the
> >> > Webcasting. NSI have kindly agreed to sponsor the web 
> cast SUBJECT to
> >> > obtaining an acceptable costing from ICANN/Berkman. If 
> the costs are
> >> > toooooo great we will need additional sponsors and your offer of
> >> > assistance is most appreciated YJ. I hope John will be 
> able to come back
> >> > to us/Roger within a day or two so we can put this issue 
> to behind us.
> >> > Thanks Roger for helping out.....
> >>
> >> This sounds we almost fixed the dnso web cast decision for LA.
> >> As you suggested here, I will be happy to get additional sponsors
> >> in asia subject to the funding update by John and Roger.
> >>
> >> > For future meetings it may be a good idea to set-up a 
> "fund" for remote
> >> > participation costs so we don't have this predicament at each
> >> > meeting....
> >>
> >> If nc's exsiting budget committee can come up with a 
> long-term plan,
> >> this would be a good starting point to discuss and finalise it,
> >> hopely until LA meeting.
> >>
> >> > As for the room allocation. I have volunteered to be the 
> liaison.....
> >> >
> >> > Would EACH constituency please advise me of the capacity 
> of the room,
> >> > whether they prefer morning or afternoon, the expected 
> duration (eg. ??
> >> > hours) for their constituency meeting and any "special" 
> facilities
> >> > required by their constituency for the meeting.
> >>
> >> Thanks for your volunteer.
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> Non-Commercial Domain Name Holder's Constituency
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> Date: 2000. 11. 13. Monday
> >> Place: Marriot(?)
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> Expected attendees: 60 - 70 (?)
> >> Expected time: 9:00 - 18:00
> >> Expected facilities: 4 - 5 microphones, LCD Projector
> >> --------------------------------------------------------
> >> NCC is going to have a teleconference too, however,
> >> usually the telephone facility has been provided by ncc itself.
> >>
> >> If further info is needed, please contact me.
> >> Thanks again,
> >>
> >> YJ
> >>
> >> > Thanks for your help
> >> >
> >> > Best
> >> >
> >> > Paul
> >> >
> >> > YJ Park wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Andrew and NC members,
> >> > >
> >> > > > Please see my attached email of 17 September, which 
> repeats *two*
> >> earlier
> >> > > > requests that the Names Council urgently decide (1) 
> whether to
> >webcast
> >> the
> >> > > > LA DNSO meetings, and, if so, how to pay for it;  and (2) the
> >schedule
> >> for
> >> > > > the LA meetings, and the identity of the scheduling contact.
> >> > >
> >> > > I have been a bit confused on whether web cast issue 
> was going to be
> >> > > discussed
> >> > > in the budget committee rather than nc as a whole during the
> >> teleconference.
> >> > > Since this was tabled due to lack of time, we'd better start to
> >clarify
> >> each
> >> > > member's
> >> > >
> >> > > (1) yes and no to webcast the LA dnso meetings
> >> > >      if it turns out yes, let's suggest how to pay for it.
> >> > >
> >> > > (2) schedule for the LA meetings and the identity of 
> the scheduling
> >> contact.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> >> > > YJ Park, Non-commercial Constituency
> >> > >
> >> > > (1) Yes.
> >> > >       If it is going to be paid by donation by the 
> companies, I will
> >try
> >> to
> >> > > raise fund
> >> > >       among companies in asia area asap. I prefer this option.
> >> > >       And if it is going to be paid by each 
> constituency, ncc is going
> >> to
> >> > > try to share it.
> >> > >
> >> > > (2) I'm going to contact John and Paul as ncc contact 
> point within 24
> >> hrs.
> >> >
> >>
> >> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> >> > >
> >> > > > If the Names Council does not tomorrow make those 
> decisions, I will
> >> assume
> >> > > > that the DNSO will not be meeting in LA, and that no 
> webcast should
> >be
> >> > > > arranged.
> >> > >
> >> > > Hope it's not too late.
> >> > >
> >> > > As I proposed a teleconference on Otc. 5 in the 
> review-committee,
> >> > > another brief teleconference, 20 mins asap might be an 
> option to wrap
> >> this
> >> > > up.
> >> > >
> >> > > Let's wind this up asap.
> >> > >
> >> > > YJ
> >> > >
> >> > > > --Andrew
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > From: owner-council@dnso.org 
> [mailto:owner-council@dnso.org]On
> >Behalf
> >> Of
> >> > > Ken
> >> > > > Stubbs
> >> > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2000 10:40 PM
> >> > > > To: Elisabeth PORTENEUVE; Dany Vandromme; Andrew 
> McLaughlin; Louis
> >> Touton;
> >> > > > names council
> >> > > > Cc: roberto gaetano; Mike Roberts
> >> > > > Subject: [council] names council teleconference thurdsay 21
> >september
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > for some reason the names council teleconference 
> which is scheduled
> >> for
> >> > > > tomorrow has not been posted by elisabeth so here goes
> >> > > >
> >> > > > date: thurdsay september 21, 2000
> >> > > > time: 08:00 usa eastern time 14:00 cet
> >> > > >
> >> > > > telephone number
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Then the dial number will be +33-1-41-74-78-83
> >> > > > No passcode is required
> >> > > >
> >> > > > agenda items:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > approval of prior meetings minutes
> >> > > > budget workgroup report roger & erica
> >> > > > dnso review report- theresa
> >> > > > financial report from icann staff
> >> > > > icann staff report
> >> > > > for status on independent  review panel nominations.
> >> > > > proxy voting proposal - paul kane
> >> > > > business constituancy dues problem
> >> > > > intake committee report
> >> > > > discussion regarding individual outreach and representation
> >> > > >
> >> > > > we have a lot to accomplish here and i plan on starting the
> >conference
> >> on
> >> > > > time...
> >> > > >
> >> > > > repeat.... 08:00 usa eastern time 14:00 CET thursday 
> 21 september
> >> > > >
> >> > > > see you on the call..
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> >
> >>
> 
>