Agenda points for the meeting of the ICANN Board with the NCSG

[Dan Krimm]

Point well taken, Milton.  I suppose there are probably a number of NPOC
"members" who have no real idea of what is going on with the NPOC
leadership.  It's the Principal/Agent Problem gone hog-wild.  So in all
cases in my previous message where I wrote "NPOC" you may replace that with
"NPOC leadership"...

Dan


--
Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do
not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.



At 8:14 PM +0000 10/22/11, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>Please let's not attack NPOC per se, because there are many good
>organizations in NPOC. It's unfortunate that they were trapped in this
>dysfunctional GNSO Constituency scheme and used as pawns by certain people.
>
>I agree with Avri that we don't need constituency-based tribalism. But
>such tribalism is the whole purpose of GNSO SG constituencies, as forced
>on us by the staff/Board. The people who insisted on the constituency
>model know this - it allows a small group, such as the "NPOC leadership"
>which really consists of three people, to count for as much as 150 others,
>and to pretend to be speaking for a larger group.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>
>> Well, I think we are beyond that being a possibility.
>> I would prefer to see us find a way to get beyond the inter-constituency
>> tribalism.
>>
>> Often there is a gulf between the leaders of a group who are forced into
>> hard positions to defend their tribe and the general good.  I think we
>> still have to find the way for the leaders to move toward the general
>> good.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 22 Oct 2011, at 11:56, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>>
>> > 5. Get rid of NPOC
>> >
>> > -J