[ncdnhc-discuss] Realism on Adcom procedure

[Milton Mueller]

I feel the need to introduce some realism into the discussion
of Adcom procedure. I note that this discussion has been 
sparked primarily by the complaints of one person.

A few people believe that every decision that Adcom or our 
elected Names Council representatives make needs to be "put
before the membership" on an asychronous mailing list, and
that this is somehow more "democratic" or will result in better
decisions. 

There are several problems with this.

First, most members want the elected representative to do
most of the work. That is why they elected them. They don't
want to be involved in every little decision. In fact, they may
get irritated and quit if we are forced to hold procedureless
online straw polls every time we need to add someone to a Task
Force on the NC.

Second, asychronous communication in English on an email
list, as I have consistently argued, is a horrible method of 
achieving consensus and is often procedurally unfair. 
Some people like Jamie Love constantly monitor this list 
and send out several messages daily (except of course 
for when he disappears for six months, but that's another 
story). Others check in once a week. Others just
show up for votes. And there are all kinds of positions
in between. Some are native english speakers, others
are not. The idea that micromanagement can take place
fairly and equally in such an environment is ridiculous. 

Of course there must be a continuing consultation and
communication between the membership and the 
elected Adcom. If Adcom is uncertain or seriously divided
about how to handle an important issue, they should definitely 
consult the membership. But it really is not practical to 
collectively make every decision on the email list. and
let me remind you that the discuss list is not even 
confined to NCDNHC members, giving vocal non-members
more input than quiet members.

This is the voice of real experience. The people on the
Adcom are doing hard work on our behalf, and we pile on
tons of extra work - to no good result - if we don't trust
them and insist on throwing every decision into the morass
of discuss at icann-ncc.org. 

Trust is really what it is all about. I respectfully suggest that
we trust our elected adcom members and suggest that they
trust the membership and consult it when they need to.
Along with trust goes monitoring and verification. Keep an
eye on what they do, and if it seems wrong, then challenge
it and/or next time don't vote for that person. But don't
make suspicion and contentiousness a routine.