Re: [ICANN-EU] funding, was: Questions for Jeanette Hofmann and the othercandidates

["Griffini Giorgio" <grigio@mediapoint.it>]

From:           	"Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de>
> 
> > Joop Teernstra wrote:
> > ...
> > > 
> > > Then I'm afraid you will not be able to devote all your time to ICANN.
> > 
> > You will never find a Board Member who will do that. If ICANN had been a
> > "World Gvernment", yes. But it is not. 
> 
> To comment, for the time being, only on this point:
>  I wouldn't want to give up my job either. Both for personal  and 
> political reasons I don't find a full-time job model by any means ideal. 
>
> Here are some reasons:
I'm sorry but I have to disagree with your opinions.... 
> 
> 1. For the sake of personal independance, the director shouldn't be on 
> ICANN's payroll (or any other organization directly involved, for that 
> matter). 
For a director which is not (s)elected by ICANN establishment being on 
ICANN payroll will not mean to be under 'ICANN control'. It will just avoid 
(s)he will have to search for funding elsewhere if this is going to be an issue. 
Second, being independent enough to anyway go against the supporting 
party should be considered a value rather than a risk.

> 
> 2. A voluntary commitment of the at-large director makes sure that he 
> or she doesn't become some sort of high-ranking functionary or 
> official who acts an behalf of the community. 
> The director needs the input of many volunteers and will be as 
> efficient and successful as the support he or she gets. In other words, 
> the burden should be borne by many shoulders. Otherwise, we 
> jeopardize the democratic character of the whole endeavour. 
> 
Actually, if the director is to be considered as just a spokes(wo)man of a 
larger group a simple petition document would fit the role. Note that this also 
doesn't fit well on what a director is asked to do by the Bylaws.

> 3. However, I do believe that some sort of funding for the coordination 
> and communication of the european at-large members would be 
> indeed helpful. 
> And such a funding could be, perhaps, 
> administered by the at-large director. 
>From where this funding should come from ? Supporters? 
If yes, it will more closely resemble a constituency like those of DNSO.
If no, how can we be assured the sponsor will not drive the rules ?

Best regards
Giorgio Griffini.