NCUC & NCSG diversity & participation

[Robin Gross]

I also have significant concerns about ICANN's plan to penalize
noncommercial users who are not "active" in the GNSO with less
representation.

When you vote in a democracy, you don't have to prove that you
donated 100 hours of community service in order to be entitled to a
vote, as ICANN proposes.  No, this is just another another mechanism
to gate and minimize user participation and influence.

What about people in developing countries who can't get online and
can't raise the funds to get to ICANN meetings or to be in a position
to donate their time to ICANN?   They aren't entitled to a vote on
Internet policy because they aren't "active" enough for ICANN?  What
about the fact ICANN is mainly conducted in English?  It seems non-
English speakers who cannot "actively" participate don't deserve a
vote either?

ICANN needs to understand it costs noncommercial organizations and
individuals to participate at ICANN in ways that are unique to all
other ICANN stakeholders.  There are significant bars to ICANN
participation that ICANN cannot use to "gate" to representation of
noncommercial users.  Not in a democratic institution accountable to
the global public interest.

Robin


On Aug 6, 2009, at 2:17 AM, William Drake wrote:

> Hi Adam,
>
> I'm fine with restating openness to dialogue etc as you suggest.
> Not that we haven't before.
>
> Would like to pick up on one specific bit:
>
> On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>
>> The NCUC does not have membership (or significant membership) from
>> international consumer organizations (noted in many recent
>> comments from the board and others as a missing constituent in all
>> of ICANN), nor for the largest academic communities, libraries,
>> R&D, etc.
>
> This may well be "noted" by the board and others but it is patently
> untrue http://ncuc.syr.edu/members.htm.   Just more
> disinformation.  (BTW I also noted some on the transcript of the
> ALAC call, e.g. Nick saying that the NCUC proposal does not allow
> board approval of constituencies...facts don't matter if one can't
> be bothered to learn them).
>
> Which is not to say that it wouldn't be great to have more groups
> with "consumer" in their title etc.
>
> Perhaps this needs to be a larger, more focused discussion
> sometime, but while I think of it it's worth mentioning that there
> is also a claim in said circles that our members are not all
> sufficiently active and hence our diversity is just on paper, which
> in turn is supposed to allow for "capture" by a small cabal.  This
> of course is held against us as well, and will be relevant in the
> NCSG.  As you know, the staff's "Suggested Additional Stakeholder
> Group Charter Elements to Ensure Transparency, Openness, Fairness
> and Representativeness Principles" hold, inter alia, that "It is
> important that the Board and the community have the ability to
> determine what parties comprise a particular GNSO structure and who
> participates in an active way....[hence] Each GNSO structure should
> collect, maintain, and publish active and inactive member names
> identified by membership category (if applicable)"
>
> I raised concerns about the reasoning and operational implications
> of this on the last GNSO call, but they were pretty much brushed
> aside.  So I guess in some unknown manner members will have to show
> sufficient signs of life on a frequent enough basis for staff to
> deem them active and consider their views to "count" when
> constituencies state positions.  Oh, and meeting attendance lists
> must be published and will be considered too.  At least, all this
> undoubtedly will apply to nomcomm constituencies, business ones may
> get the usual pass from the standards to which we're held.
>
> And now I have to reply to the council list about this claim in the
> SOI that we are "not yet sufficiently diverse or robust to select
> all six"...sigh.  Pushing back on relentless disinfo does get
> tiring...
>
> Bill




IP JUSTICE
Robin Gross, Executive Director
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA  94117  USA
p: +1-415-553-6261    f: +1-415-462-6451
w: http://www.ipjustice.org     e: robin at ipjustice.org



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20090806/e2528574/attachment.html>