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

[William Drake]

Hi

> On Feb 23, 2015, at 3:23 AM, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 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 <http://ncuc.org/> instead?  Second, "to get for updates” needs a copy edit.
> 
> You're right. Now it's fixed.
> 
> I suggested ncsg.is <http://ncsg.is/> since it includes a lot of info about policy work. you can still add that to the question  with ncuc.org <http://ncuc.org/>
Sure, just indicate which why so no confusion
>  
>   
> > 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is not a veteran -like myself- I would certainly not know about which WGs or committees are continuing and which are no longer active.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

The term of art is Cross Community Working Groups, probably best to use the official lingo

> - 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 <http://gnso.icann.org/en/council/project>, active http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active <http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/active> , completed here http://gnso.icann.org/group-activites/inactive-teams.htm <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 <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 

So active and sleeping but wake-able seems a good cut
> 
> 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 .

Ah, thanks, I forgot Rafik.  Is there a single page somewhere with pointers all NCSG mail lists, like http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo?  I should know this but don’t, and don’t see it on the wiki.  I know some are hosted at Syracuse and some at IPJustice but links could be aggregated...

BTW Walid I think one of your questions was about whether a guide to acronyms would help new members.  Have you seen this https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/glossary-2014-02-03-en 

Maybe we should link to it from the NCUC page as Rafik has done from the NCSG wiki…In fact, I don’t think we have many links between the two generally, maybe we should look into better integration.

Any other questionnaire feedback from people, or are we ready to launch?

Best

Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/membership-affairs/attachments/20150223/81e401b4/attachment-0002.html>