[NCUC-DISCUSS] LAC/Developing countries engagement strategies

[Olévié Kouami]

+1 @Rafik.
Agree with using adhocracy.de as a tool to improve pour participation in
this juge process.
Thank Renata for raising up real concern.
Let's move forward.
Olévié
Le 18 août 2016 21:06, "Rafik Dammak" <rafik.dammak at gmail.com> a écrit :

> Hi Renata,
>
> Thanks for the question. as someone from developing countries I understand
> the concerns and that was an area of focus for years.
>
> I would like to clarify some things first. For the case of NCUC,  we have
> regional representatives in Executive committee and they are expected to
> liaise with the members of their region and also doing outreach.  While the
> GNSO councillors are more focused on policy work and there is the
> geographical diversity in NCSG charter.it is probably not enough nor
> fully working, and so things need to be improved to encompass the diversity
> of needs.
>
> I don't think the solution would be to focus on specific regions per se
> but on working on better wider membership engagement to benefit all. There
> may be some differences and specific for each region and we have to find
> out how identify them efficiently.
> I am not aware about specific regional effort from other groups within
> GNSO, I do think that is mostly about outreach and we do that as you know.
> there are what is called the regional strategy working group  for most of
> the region. They are kind of cross-community groups, for example several
> NCUC members and myself are members of the on for MENA region and
> adjourning countries.
>
> The idea is to make the the policy discussion more accessible and easy to
> digest, sometimes we have either too much information ( long reports during
> public comment) or not enough , or with a lot of jargon or details that
> make it hard to grasp if you didn't follow the process etc. We got to find
> the right balance, format and the yesterday call, there was some agreement
> about having the regular briefing and improving the discussion in NCSG
> policy call. we can experiment those changes in coming days and say how it
> works. by iterations, we would reach the right solution(s) that may satisfy
> most the of people. that may help to build the foundations for better
> engagement.
>
> by informing better the members, I do think they can identify what are the
> topics that interest them and have impact on their region and specific
> needs. it would be hard for individual councillors to  identify the needs
> of a region by him/herself and s/he needs members support on that matter.
> At NCSG, we advocated for the applicant support for new gTLD some years
> ago and the topic is gonna be in table soon with the new working group.
> This is an example where if we can give better explanation about the
> context, background the members from developing regions can provide their
> input and their insight and feeling more involved.
>
> We will do more information sharing in appropriate format and manner, do
> poll/consultation either formal or informal manner. On another thread I
> proposed that we experiment the https://adhocracy.de/ tool again which
> give the possibility to poll, track comments etc. Additional way would be
> to have some communication channel (mailing list, skype channel, slack
> channel etc depending on the widely used tool in that region) to ask
> members from one region about their thought for specific topic. but we also
> need to avoid creating silos. I would also encourage more bottom-up,
> self-organizing efforts from members and councillors would be happy to help
> for sure (I am volunteering to help of course :-) ). we all are volunteers
> here and any help is welcome to share the workload.
>
> Best,
>
> Rafik
>
> 2016-08-19 0:37 GMT+09:00 Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> Just wanted to clarify a point of a question I made during the candidates
>> call
>>
>> It is great that both NCSG and NCUC have amazing LAC representatives.
>> They not only represent the region but maintain online actions
>> engaging civil society in IG which are key to participating in LAC.
>> A while ago there was a comment about one of the reps current address
>> being in EU. I do not mind and have not heard about any LAC colleague
>> that worries about this. It is more important what someone lives as
>> coming from the region and doing work for it than actually living
>> there. Speaking as a researcher, the few opportunities I had of doing
>> work abroad were very impactful for the group and region I come from.
>>
>> So the point was
>>
>> Given the low level of participation of LAC and other developing
>> regions in policymaking process at GNSO, it is important that the
>> candidates keep thinking about strategies to listen to these voices.
>> Specifically in LAC's case, the disengagment due to the ICANN's 2 year
>> distance from the region will only worsen. Other sectors in ICANN have
>> been working on ways to react to this. I have seen no reaction from
>> GNSO or NCUC/NCSG.
>>
>> So without addressing this problem, it does not seem possible that
>> there will be new engagement of volunteers in GNSO.
>>
>> That was just an observation.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Renata
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
>> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ncuc-discuss mailing list
> Ncuc-discuss at lists.ncuc.org
> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20160823/23623259/attachment-0002.html>