Constituencies was Re: [] . Nomination for …

[Evan Leibovitch]

On 24 October 2012 13:00, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

There used to be a notion that several would spin out of NCUC as it had
> been the only and omnibus constituency for all Non Commercial groups but no
> longer needed to maintain that function. NCUC serves NGOs, advocacy,
> academia et al, and has participating members of every type of
> NonCommercial.


I think that was the PoV of the people who were trying to create the (since
abandoned) Consumer Group Constituency a few years ago. I was close to (but
not a part of) that effort, and found a resistance that, at the time, took
me by surprise. So long as diversity of power within the NCSG is seen as a
zero-sum game (ie, anything new must come at the expense of influence of
the NCUC) such resistance will exist. The wearing down of the CGC attempt
into oblivion (my PoV) has not been good sign to anyone else on the outside
seeking the diversity that Avri advocates (and with which I personally
agree).

But any significant moves right now may be temporary anyway, given that the
upcoming GNSO review can't be put off forever. IMO the bicameral structure
we have now -- with policy being made inside what is essentially a compact
between domain sellers and domain buyers, to the general exclusion of those
outside -- is ripe for disruption. And while that specific view is my
personal opinion, change along these lines is clearly indicated as well in
the ALAC R3 white paper. I myself eagerly await the GNSO review and
anticipate that ICANN's advisory bodies will have much to contribute.

As a co-chair of the Future Challenges Working Group, I can state that
advancing the positive evolution of ICANN's MSM -- including within the
GNSO -- is most certainly within our scope.

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20121024/607a1c44/attachment-0001.html>