for Debbie: Explaining votes made while representing NCSG while on GNSO Council

[William Drake]

Hi

On Oct 14, 2011, at 9:55 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> On 14 Oct 2011, at 15:43, Alain Berranger wrote:
> 
>> Since NCUC leadership is controlling NCSG (approval of NPOC members and its impact on the election process, travel allocation issues, etc...) there is not much space for NPOC to debate.
> 
> 
> I beleive this is a false statement.  
> 
> The NCSG-EC is composed of both NCUC and NPOC.
> Yes they have yet to learnt to work together, but the NCUC is not controlling the NCSG.
> 
> Even the previous NCSG-EC had an NPOC member on it.
> 
> And I have been trying to get the NPOC members to join the NCSG for over a year, but most refused to do so until they got their constituency.
> And further, on the vote, of the NPOC members who had been accepted as members, only a few ever bothered to check in, hence like most of the NCUC inactive members, cannot vote.  This has NOTHING to do with the NCSG-EC or allegations of prejudice by NCUC.
> 
> Which made me curious about their commitment to membership.
> 
> In my opinion the only reason NPOC is not involved in the debate is because the NPOC has not bothered to involve itself in the debate.

Which raises again Katitza's unanswered question about how many members are there?   On this list we generally only hear from Alain and eventually Debra, which makes discussions about relations between "the two sides" feel a bit…let's say, abstract.  Looking at the archive for the NPOC list http://forum.icann.org/lists/npoc-voice/ I see just 23 messages exchanged over more than three years, and 12 of these are from Alain and 6 are from Amber.  Moreover, of the 9 DNS Policy Comments Submitted to ICANN by NPOC Members http://www.npoc.org/icannsubmittedcomments.html, 4 were Submitted by the American Red Cross and International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (Debra) and 3 were Submitted by the Association of American Medical Colleges (Amber).  

So after all this time and drama, I still don't know who all is REALLY involved in NPOC beyond lending their names to the efforts of a couple people, or what concerns they wish to advance in ICANN beyond trademark protection for their respective organizations.  To put it gently, this leaves one a bit baffled by accusations that NCUC is somehow being unfair to them (which usually translates into direct and nontransparent complaints to the Board, as has just happened again) or failing to debate issues and try to come to consensus with them in a manner they find suitably congenial.  I'd be happy to try to work with some identifiable people who sometimes may have different perspectives than my own, but I don't know how to do it with phantoms.   So if some other NPOCers could please start to participate and spell out their agenda on ICANN issues we could then begin to actually debate things and see where there is or isn't common ground.  There's a meeting coming up in Dakar, there will be motions on the Council's agenda, how about we start talking as a SG about positions and such?

Thanks,

Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20111015/59591a70/attachment-0001.html>