[Ec-ncuc] On (mis)trust and cooperation

[Milton L Mueller]

Yes, I think we _should_ be able to make a great team. 

Of course there is a communication-transition problem. The people who preceded you don't know what you don't know! Most of us have never met you in person. So it is not obvious what you need to be told. There are bound to be surprises and a learning curve. but it is more than that, it is a resource problem. It takes a lot of time to mesh gears, explore these knowledge gaps and convey the information you are seeking - and we are all volunteers with extremely demanding other jobs. 

Really, if a $2000 expenditure knocks people for a loop, what will happen when this EC faces a real, hard problem? Let's try to be more flexible. There is going to be friction in the transition, but there is no need to make that into a big problem. 

The mistrust I sense, especially from Edward, is utterly baffling because NCUC has never had it so good. ICANN now funds all councilors and 5 or 6 other people from our SG to go to meetings; only 3 years ago only councilors were funded and 5 years ago NO ONE was! 6 or 7 years ago we could manage to pull together a policy conference every second or third year. Now we are contemplating doing one every ICANN meeting. 5 or 6 years ago $5000 was our entire contribution from PIR, now it is a relatively minor expense. I really don't understand the negativity that seems to emanate from certain people on this list. You've got great opportunities and enhanced capabilities; a lot of people who came before you did a lot of hard work to make this possible. Please don't insult them by dismissing the entire prior history of NCUC as "non-functional" and don't view everything that happened before you arrived on the scene with suspicion. Let's try to see some real leadership and mobilization of the resources we have!

--MM

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> May I suggest the problem is a communication problem more than anything
> else. Perhaps we are a more diverse group than the previous EC and need
> more time to get used to each other.
> 
> I know I'm still on a steep learning curve, both on the substantive
> issues as well as procedural, and I may have not always been as polite
> as I should have in asking for information I feel I need in order to
> catch up.
> But I really need it - for example, I can't in good conscience make
> decisions about spending money if I don't understand where it comes from
> and how much there is. So bear with me.
> 
> And when it comes to substance, policy, I can say that as far as I can
> tell, especially based on your writings, we are in perfect agreement.
> There's no quarrel about where we want to go, only friendly (I trust)
> disagreement on how to best get there.
> 
> So, let's all try to avoid hasty words and attributing malice where
> ignorance is an adequate explanation.
> We should be able to make a good team yet.
> 
> --
> Tapani Tarvainen