Results of the Chartering process

[Alex Gakuru]

Carlos,

For example, I have been a volunteer on PDP-WT holding weekly (sometimes
twice) calls since 2009.  JAS-WG holds 2 weekly calls, NCUC/SG - monthly
calls, among other Work Groups/ Work Teams/Interest Groups special calls,
events, and emails. Singapore added me to yet another
[gnso-consumercci-dt].

There is a Kenyan whom clearly cautions local folk
against participating because of the commitment, time and opportunity costs
it entails. Now contrast with ICANN's repeated calls asking people
"participate"?

Multiplicity of new ones definitely risk burning out  already fatigued
volunteers who are not in this for the money and whom instead actually
donate to/or fund raise participation.

Clearly new constituencies are great new volunteers participation
dis-incentives.

Thanks for raising it.

Alex

On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> Besides agreeing with Milton, I would add that most of us (nearly all of
> the 200 NCUCers at least) are volunteers in our involvement in the ICANN
> processes. Dispersing efforts via many specific constituencies will
> simply guarantee more ineffectiveness when our time to dedicate to these
> processes is really short.
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 07/01/2011 01:16 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>
> >> Hi Milton
> >>
> >> I've got problems with the "advancing an agenda" model - could it apply
> >> to Privacy, IP ....to mean we didn't need constituencies in these areas
> >> also...
> >
> > [Milton L Mueller] It certainly does. We do not have a privacy
> constituency. We don't need one. About half of the organizations and
> individuals in NCSG consider privacy to be a concern of theirs. If you form
> a new constituency you just force the same people to join yet another group
> with another mailing list and another set of internal politics without
> adding ANYTHING to their capacity to work on privacy issues.
> >
> > Rosemary, it's depressing to see you fall into the same superficial
> thinking of ICANN staff that got us into this mess in the first place. The
> idea that need a "constituency" for every issue that comes along, or every
> set of concerns, is just fallacious. Consumers don't need an ICANN
> constituency. They need people (like you) who know something about the issue
> and are willing to devote time and energy to working on it, i.e. join
> Working Groups, file comments, analyze proposals, etc. Building a
> constituency just adds more administrative overhead, and thereby detracts
> from the actual work. ICANN is full of these little organizational niches,
> and that's why people in ICANN spend most of their time talking about
> process and about how all these little moving parts jostle up against each
> other, but so little actual policy work gets done.
> >
> > NCSG is the civil society constituency in ICANN. The more integrated is
> our communication and the less organizational bullshit of this sort we have
> to deal with, the better we can function.
> >
> >
> >> I'll check again with ALAC but a number of their folks have expressed
> >> interest in Singapore in advancing the consumer constituency ...
> >>
> > [Milton L Mueller] No, they're not. We spoke with them Thursday and there
> was strong support for a consumer AGENDA but when we asked why they needed a
> constituency they couldn't come up with a reason. Consumer AGENDA is easily
> de-linked from a consumer CONSTITUENCY. By the same token, the two are
> easily confused. Many people in ALAC make the same mistake you are making -
> they assume that pursuing a consumer agenda = pursuing a consumer
> constituency. I am asserting that that equation is false.
> >
> > Haven't heard a single effective argument to the contrary yet.
> >
> > To quote the dearly departed Rita Rodin, we have to get beyond the
> "consumers - WOO HOO!" stage and think more carefully about what to DO.
> > Forming a constituency commits us all to a lot of work and politicking
> that is actually divisive, structurally complicated, fragmenting - without
> adding ANYTHING to our ability to pursue a consumer agenda.
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20110701/dde44cb9/attachment-0001.html>