[Membership-affairs] {SPAM} Re: [NCUC-EC] point on the membership survey

[Rafik Dammak]

Hi Walid,


>
> > Q15: Regarding the second option: posing use of the NCSG wiki as an
> alternative to the NCUC
> >mail list seems confusing because the survey is for NCUC members, not
> NCSG members, and they
> >wouldn’t get any NCUC info from the NCSG wiki.  If you want to frame it
> as a choice between platforms
>  >for updates, wouldn’t it make sense to say ncuc.org instead?  Second,
> "to get for updates” needs a copy edit.
>
> *You're right. Now it's fixed.*
>

I suggested ncsg.is since it includes a lot of info about policy work. you
can still add that to the question  with ncuc.org


>
> > Q16: The list mixes current groups with older ones like JAS but not
> MAPO, not sure why.
>
> *This is actually a great observation. For someone who is not a veteran
> -like myself- I would certainly not know about which WGs or committees are
> continuing and which are no longer active. I just relied on the official
> ICANN GNSO Confluence web page
> <http://t.signalecinque.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJN7t5XX4Rs3g6VRJgRz5wvCLRW2zq5cM56dB2Rf3GmCG602?t=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fcategory%2Fgnso&si=4815485689397248&pi=c480a93d-7f2d-44d1-faec-ad532df805ca>
> and simply copied and pasted all the working groups and committees that
> were listed there under the two headlines:*
>
> *- Joint SO/AC Working Groups*
> *- GNSO Working Groups/Drafting Teams/Steering Committees/Work Teams*
>

for GNSO WGs, the list and status is indicated here:
http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project, active
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active , completed here
http://gnso.icann.org/group-activites/inactive-teams.htm
other GNSO activities, which are not necessarily WGs
http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/other

there is no master list for CCWGs and confluence remains the reference. btw
JAS is dormant and can be reactivated anytime

we can ask people about WGs in general if they are or were participating in
some. that can give an idea of some didn't get involved since a while.

>In any event, could you please include the Cross Community Working Group
> on Internet Governance as an option, a
> >number of us are in there.  Ditto the CCWG on Accountability.  I'd list
> the informal CC group on human rights
> >as well, a number of us have been putting in time there.  More generally,
> it might be sensible to separately
> >group the GNSO groups and the CCWGs.
>
> *I have split the question into to, one for GNSO groups and the other for
> CCWGs, whose list I also got  from the Confluence page
> <http://t.signalecinque.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJN7t5XX4Rs3g6VRJgRz5wvCLRW2zq5cM56dB2Rf3GmCG602?t=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.icann.org%2Fcategory%2Fcrosscommunitywg&si=4815485689397248&pi=c480a93d-7f2d-44d1-faec-ad532df805ca>.
> I am still not fully aware of which WGs are active and which are not. Let
> me know if I need to remove any.*
>


> > Q19: Neither the bylaws nor event planning teams nor the lists created
> for them are operational.  Similarly,
> >there is no NCUC privacy group, and to be honest I didn’t know a mail
> list had been created.  I’d suggested
> >such a group last year when about twenty people said they were interested
> in working on privacy, but then
> >others objected that any privacy work had to be done at the SG level
> (where no privacy group was formed,
> >but whatever).  Listing these will artificially increase the number of
> “not engaged” responses and present a
> >distorted picture.  I would remove these options, and if we (re)create
> groups to perform these functions in the
> >future and fire up the lists we can put fresh information on the website.
>

@Bill just for clarification, there is a NCSG privacy list  and there was
discussion following-up the meeting with the board in singapore last year
.and there is even an etherpad where several people worked on .

Rafik
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/membership-affairs/attachments/20150223/3b32216c/attachment-0002.html>