<html><head><base href="x-msg://130/"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>I would rather see efforts exerted in the direction of increasing participation from NCUC members, new and old, instead of creating new constituencies and spreading thin the efforts of the few active members we have even more. Wasn't this a concern raised in Toronto? In-reach and outreach?</div><div><br></div><div>Amr</div><br><div><div>On Oct 24, 2012, at 7:34 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS'; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div class="WordSection1" style="page: WordSection1; "><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">No more constituencies, yes.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">And end to SGs? No.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">The SGs should be very broad, stable, neutral and balanced divisions of the groups and individuals involved, such as commercial v noncommercial or supply industry vs. users.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">Then, within those broad groupings, one can have many short-term interest groups or coalitions or alliances form to push a particular position. Linking positions to structural groupings is a big mistake, which leads to divisiveness and fragmentation and power games.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); ">The example of an "academic" constituency, e.g., is not useful because academics are already well-represented in NCUC. If some people from academia care about a particular position, they can organize around it. If two groups of academics disagree on what is the best policy, fine, let them disagree. We must not pretend that all academics, or all academic organizations, want the same thing, yet this what the whole idea of constituencies lends itself to.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; color: rgb(31, 73, 125); "><o:p> </o:p></span></div><div style="border-top-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-bottom-style: none; border-width: initial; border-color: initial; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: blue; border-left-width: 1.5pt; padding-top: 0in; padding-right: 0in; padding-bottom: 0in; padding-left: 4pt; "><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'; color: rgb(153, 0, 0); ">Thanks Milton. </span><o:p></o:p></div><div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'; color: rgb(153, 0, 0); ">So what are you thinking: would you go as far as no more Constituencies? no more Stakeholders' Groups? a completely different model based on gTLDs communities? What are the practical alternatives to the current model of multiple Constituencies in the same SG? I can think of a few myself, but nothing short term and until the GNSO management review is completed, structures are better left alone, no? </span><o:p></o:p></div><div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><o:p> </o:p></div></div><div><div style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "><span style="font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'; color: rgb(153, 0, 0); ">Also, I noted the recent and spontaneous early thinking in Toronto during our NCSG meetings (notably by David Cake) about the "real" differences between NCUC and NPOC (We have all faced that question - Marie-laure and I got it from NPOC's session with the Fellows for instance), maybe we should work on that, so that we have a clear message out before the inter-sessional and Beijing meetings? Also, how about my "old" idea of an Academia Constituency somewhere in the future...? I sensed it was not very popular but many other MS organizations use a taxonomy that give a specific place to Universities/Academics.</span><o:p></o:p></div></div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right: 0in; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; margin-top: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; "></p></div></div></div></div></div></span></blockquote></div><br></body></html>