[NCUC-EC] Teams & EC Churn
Edward Morris
edward.morris at alumni.usc.edu
Mon Jun 10 20:07:17 CEST 2013
Hello Bill,
Hi,
> I don't see much relation between that characterization and what I have
> done as chair; e.g. I laid out an agenda in the election season, ran on it,
> and then tried to get people help to implement it. But no matter.
>
And it hasn't worked. Something you privately admitted to me within the
past week.
>
> You certainly have long range vision, the committee idea was nothing less,
> but you're pretty flexible and adaptable in ways I'm not. Both ways of
> doing things are not absolute, have various pluses and minuses, but create
> a certain tension when in concurrent operation.We see that here. What you
> may see as an opportunity, I may view as a diversion. Neither viewpoint is
> right or wrong, merely different perspectives of the same set of
> circumstances.
>
> You have led with great energy, great passion, great integrity. No one
> should doubt that William Drake has done everything he could to make the
> NCUC a viable, energetic, exciting place to be. I greatly admire what you
> have tried to do and am very sad at the energy you've had to expend facing
> opposition that has no real reason for being.
>
> I can't pretend any more that I'm heading a Membership Affairs committee.
> There is no such committee.
>
>
> The listserv for the Membership Team was launched 31 May and you are
> already declaring it dead? I'm on that team, told you I would support any
> efforts you made to lead it forward, and suggested a concrete and small,
> doable project to start with, one which up until yesterday you were saying
> you'd be happy to lead and guaranteed would get done. But whatever.
>
So let's talk about that "concrete, small and doable" project.
You come to me with a rushed request for a brochure by Durban. I had it on
the agenda for Buenos Aires. I have two people recruited to produce it and
a newsletter, both young, both enthusiastic. Both were waiting to be
admitted. Thanks to the interim NPOC chair we're actually now getting
movement on their applications. Thank God for Cintra.
So I get this enthusiastic young man ready to produce a brochure. He sends
me his cv, I forward it to you, Oops.
No, we now are having ICANN produce the brochure. Sorry Viktor. What do I
tell the kid? What do I keep telling those I've recruited who have been
sitting on waitlists for months?
The fact is we need to be building an infrastructure first before we start
on these grandiose plans. We need to know where the money is coming from,
how we are going to do things, before we involve others. Structured
planning versus fly by the seat of the pants leadership. Budgets, not just
for travel but overall.
I wonder if Viktor still wants to join the NCUC after being jerked around?
As far as our May 31st launch...unlike the Finance team and the Charter
rewrite committee (which you are the facilitator) we had meetings on
inreach and outreach. We even have minutes. People, including Roy, promised
deliverables. None took place. I'm still waiting for my first response from
someone over the age of 18 to the simple question "what would you like to
do" or for someone to take over the facilitator role. Silence from all,
including Roy. One response. I can't pretend there is a committee, I don't
know how you can.
> Well…Wilson and Tapani are taking the website forward
>
Yes, two men. With help from community members. No team needed.
At least you now acknowledge their work. Last week you posted a statement
akin to "since we won't have a website" despite previous assurances from
Tapani we would have one. That was a day you also welcomed a member I had
welcomed six months earlier, while suggesting other EC members (presumably
me) should have done so.
> There were initial glimmers of engagement in the Finance Team, but the
> lack of a coordinator soon drove it to ground.
>
Who appoints coordinators?
I have a guy up in Scotland with an MBA waiting for his first Finance
committee meeting. Still waiting.
> Reboot the EC. If Norbert decides to step down, I would like to offer to
> do the same.
>
>
> I don't see any reason to tie a solution to your situation to whatever
> Norbert decides.
>
I do. Replacing me with an individual, Roy, who failed to deliver on two
deliverables he promised (a call to the ILA to see why they joined NPOC and
not NCUC and active recruitment of library and i.p. professionals) is not
going to change anything. Replacing two people with new blood might.
>
> I appreciate your goodwill and offer, and I think it makes sense and we
> should act on it immediately rather than screw around drawing things out.
> This way you'll be freed up entirely to work on your DT, hang with your
> SO, and all the other stuff you mentioned on the Membership Team list.
>
Let's be clear about one thing: although I'm just a volunteer and not
someone who derives my income from internet governance, I would not be
stepping down due to lack of time, I would be stepping down due to lack of
confidence in your program going forward. The things you mentioned are the
reasons I can't commit to produce a brochure in two weeks. I was going to
work my ass off to get it done in four. I will note, Dr. Drake, that you
don't seem to be able to find time to produce a brochure quickly yourself.
You certainly are citing time constraints in your responses to Carlos and
Milton (no Carlos, I don't think you should have to fly into Durban a few
days early to arrange for rush publication of a brochure, as Bill
suggested) when they, perhaps, don't want to do things your way.
As Tapani and Wilson can verify, I brought to Beijing samples from a U.K.
publishing company for assessment. They signed off on it. I asked you to
look at it, there was never time. If you wanted brochures done by Durban in
a manner your volunteers could produce it you needed to act then. You
decided to wait for ICANN money and you lost time. We are not staff. We are
volunteers.
> Plus, since you told me you didn't actually want to come to Durban
>
Absolutely 100% not true and you know it. Stick to the facts, please.
I was willing to step aside so others with better call on our resources
could use the support. Tapani had first call on a trip and he's earned it.
I felt it essential our African EC member be at a Meeting in Africa. Wilson
needed to be there. I only wanted to go if my need to be there was greater
than others. As you know, I proposed a way of getting non-EC people there.
We agreed to talk about that in Durban. When Wilson came up with the ISOC
trip I agreed to come. The deciding factor was my belief I might be able to
help out on the BGC issue, requests from two fellow EC members that I come
and lack of a viable alternative in the rushed manner we were asked to
provide names.
I then, as you know, had a lengthy to do with CT about getting there in
time for your event. In the end, I used £1,337 of my own money to buy a
ticket to get there for your event with the hope and prayer that ICANN will
reimburse me in time so Genvieve and I can pay our September rent. To
support you at a time when the only NCUC member showing up for your event,
according to the Doodle, was Robin Gross. I thought you needed more help. I
stepped up when others didn't.
Funny, for a guy who didn't want to come to Durban I sure as heck acted in
an unusual way.
> and would get in and out as quickly as possible, and that you're not happy
> with the outreach event etc,
>
Again, I wasn't happy with the way it was done. Good soldier that I was,
though, I risked my own money to get there to try to make it work.
> .
>
> In light of your message, I shot Roy Balleste a note saying you were
> interested in stepping down and asked whether he's accept an interim
> replacement appointment as the NA rep on the EC.
>
The word was 'willing', not 'interested'. It was preconditioned on the
actions of another. If I step down immediately an election would be
required. You would not be making an appointment. IMHO you should not have
approached others until the precondition occurred.
> I also asked if he'd be willing and able to come to Durban if we could
> get Constituency Travel to reallocate the resources.
>
First, if I were to step down and the trip had not been allocated that
would be a decision for the remaining EC members to make, not you. In many
ways this an example of one of the problems I've had with your leadership:
you're making decisions and then present them as fait accompli.
I was offered the trip, I accepted the trip. This trip was not connected
with any position I held in the NCUC. I have paid for my trip using
personal funds so I could be in Durban to support you. The ticket is
nonrefundable. If the EC no longer wishes me to go I'm happy to tear the
ticket up upon reimbursement of my outlay. It would make Genvieve very
happy. Me too.
> His answer to both was a very enthusiastic yes!! Which is great. Having
> Roy sunny outlook, technical skills (he's going to do the policy data base
> for the new website) and demonstrated willingness to actually get stuff done
>
Such as the two items he promised to do for outreach and never delivered?
I like Roy. It's a shame he hasn't stepped up to take the facilitator roll
when he had the chance. He still does.
- And meanwhile, you could reposition to a space where you're more
comfortable in all senses.
I'd be very comfortable as a member of a real Executive Committee.
When, again, will you be announcing the first of four Executive Committee
meetings you are required by the Bylaws to schedule and hold?
I have requested it Bill. Remember my month or two of saying let's follow
the bylaws?
One of the revelations for me in Beijing was how much Carlos had to offer
when asked. I really looked forward to working with him planning Buenos
Aires. If we had EC meetings perhaps he'd be able to give us more valuable
input.
I'm not comfortable being part of an illusion. The EC, the
committees...illusions when we need concrete reality.
> If this is ok with you, I will send a note to the member list saying
> you've decided to refocus your efforts on NCUC policy work and are stepping
> down, with thanks for your service and looking forward to working with you
> in your new capacity etc. etc. And write to Constituency Travel and say
> please please reallocate the Durban ticket. Sound good?
>
>
>
Absolutely not.
I will not lie to our membership. Just as I refuse to pretend we have
active, functioning committees I'm not going to tell the Members I'm
resigning because I'm not honoring the obligation I made to them when I ran
for this position, that I've found something else to do.
I will tell them, should I resign, that I am doing so because I have lost
confidence in your leadership and your plan for the Constituencies future.
I will briefly explain that I thought your committee structure was a noble
idea that has failed but rather than reboot you thought it best to continue
on that path. I will note there have been no EC meetings and our bylaws
have been ignored. I will explain my belief that we need to focus on things
like infrastructure (i.e. creating a budget and budget process, travel
policy, procedures for admitting members and an MIS to do that) rather than
the grander stuff that has been tried. We're not ready for the more
elaborate stuff.
I will tell them I personally like you as much as anyone on this planet,
that you work harder than anyone can ever expect and we're lucky to have
you. It's because of my personal affection for you, my respect for your
intelligence and integrity, that I've decided to step down to give you a
chance to succeed or fail on the basis of your leadership and your ideas,
the later of which I can no longer support. I will wish you luck and stand
ready to help you in any way I can.
Bill, I'm doing this not because I don't want to serve but because I can't
serve in the way you want me to. I have 164 names of targeted recruits on
three mailing lists ready to go out, but I won't pull the trigger until we
can handle their applications. I'm not opposed to spending $2,000 on the
dinner or picking up hotel costs, I am opposed to doing those things before
we have a budget and a financial plan. There are other EC members who agree
with this, but they are worn out.
I keep my word. I will step down if it gives you a real chance to make your
ideas a reality over the next eighteen months. That is what I stated. So,
this is what needs to be done for me to resign:
1. You need to publicly state that you are running for re-election to your
current position next year. We both know that 1) you have recently
considered taking other positions within ICANN that would require you to
leave this one and 2) that your project is, at minimum, a two year plan.
I'm leaving to give you a chance to make your plan work because I can no
longer pretend it is or will. You need to make an 18 month commitment, as
stated in my offer, to make it work. I'm not leaving a position I deeply
care about for you to run away before completing your job;
2. Norbert must decide to leave. It's my call and you need two hard working
members to have even the slightest chance of pulling this off. Replacing me
with Roy is not going to change anything. Two new people might;
3. One of your selectees, or an existing EC member, must take over the role
of MA facilitator before I step down. I will be resigning that position
immediately.
4. This all needs to be done no later than June 20th so I can plan my
commitments going forward.
Until such time as I resign by notifying the membership, I will continue
to function as North America's elected representative on the NCUC EC.
As far as Durban, you know me well enough to know that if I'm there I will
work as hard as I can to support you or anyone else who can use my help. If
you and the EC don't want me there I'm happy not to go. I will require to
be reimbursed the approximately $2,000 outlay I've already spent on my
ticket. Shame I decided to come early to support you or this would not have
been an issue.
Again, I'm doing this so you can bring in your people to accomplish your
goals. I could just stay around and be a pain in the ass or do nothing but
that doesn't accomplish much. I also like and respect you far too much. If
you can't or won't commit as I asked or things don't work out in a way
where I think you have a shot of reaching your goals then I will remain on
the EC and will work with you on areas we both agree on. I just can't
pretend I'm heading a committee that doesn't function or have a role on an
EC that never meets or act or be treated as line staff.
I'll immediately resign as facilitator of your Membership Affairs committee
and we'll wait for the rest.
I hope it all works out for everyone. Those who we represent need a real,
functioning NCUC if they are to have the type of internet they want and
deserve.
Ed
> Respectfully,
>
>
> Ditto,
>
> Bill
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 10:09 AM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I was just looking for something in Sent Mail and stumbled across this,
>> thought I would share it with the EC list in light of the view expressed
>> here last week that there'd not been enough consultation about the decision
>> to not do a policy conference in Durban but instead partner with APC and do
>> a smaller outreach thing. A train of messages followed this one on
>> different lists and bilaterally over the next two months.
>>
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> *From: *William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
>> *Subject: **[NCUC Finance] Budget Requests for Policy Conferences*
>> *Date: *March 22, 2013 5:42:54 PM GMT+01:00
>> *To: *Finance Team NCUC <finance at lists.ncuc.org>
>>
>> Update: we will not file a FTR for Durban
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>> *From: *William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
>> *Subject: **[NCUC Beijing conference] Budget Requests for Policy
>> Conferences [URGENT]*
>> *Date: *March 22, 2013 12:56:48 PM GMT+01:00
>> *To: *EC NCUC <ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org>, Program Team NCUC <
>> beijing2013 at lists.ncuc.org>
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> While I hate conversations that spill across two listservs with only
>> partially overlapping memberships, Fast Track Budget Requests are due
>> today, and I would like input from the Program Team as well as the Exec.
>> Comm. Decisions have to be made and potentially implemented and this will
>> take time, so I would really appreciate any and all helpful inputs from
>> anyone here.
>>
>> After the Toronto policy conference went well, some folks here got all
>> enthused and started saying hey let's organize a conference at every ICANN
>> meeting, NCUC's full of academics who organize meetings all the time and
>> this will be our special market niche, ICANN staff loved the conference and
>> wants us to do more, etc. First stop was to be Beijing. Mary and I
>> expressed strong reservations about how easy it'd be to do this there,
>> whether ICANN really would want to 'risk' its charm campaign for Chinese
>> engagement by having the 'trouble makers' from NCUC organizing something
>> where unpredictable types could make comments about FoE and such, etc. But
>> everyone else was psyched, so we shut up and rolled with it. And so it
>> turned out that ICANN in fact didn't want us to do this and would only give
>> us two hours, the programming of which seems not to be progressing too
>> rapidly.
>>
>> But, I understood, staff were ok with us doing something in Durban,
>> lights were green. However, since I'm working on FT requests I thought hmm
>> better be sure lights really are green and we don't need to do anything,
>> so..
>>
>> On Mar 22, 2013, at 8:07 AM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
>>
>> On another note, I sent a message to Xavier yesterday just to check and
>> be sure that ICANN support for a policy conf. In Durban is locked in (I'd
>> understood the traffic to mean that when they shot us down in Beijing it
>> was sweetened with 'but Durban is ok'). Uh, no. He says no commitment of
>> support was made and of course we have to submit a Fast Track request.
>> Glad I asked...Ay yi yi...
>>
>>
>> I'm now wondering about the wisdom of rushing out a request for a meeting
>> in Durban. I would like to suggest a different path, which is to hold off
>> and try to do one serious policy conference per year at the Annual Meeting.
>> Buenos Aires is in November, so we'd be asking for support via the regular
>> budget cycle (requests are due 19 April). Some reasons:
>>
>> - I don't believe the staff really thinks NCUC has some special
>> market niche with conferences and panels, as lots of (preferred) parts of
>> the 'community' are doing this now and will be in the future. To me, it
>> actually seems like they're in a rather different place, as evidenced by
>> this terse reply from Xavier, "I am not aware that any approval for funding
>> has been given by anyone for Durban or Buenos Aires. The requests for such
>> have not yet reached us and I don't know any other channel that could have
>> appropriately been used to obtain such approval." So right after there's
>> been some testy back and forth about what they did or didn't commit to do
>> for us in Beijing, it's not obvious that it'd be good timing to immediately
>> turn around and ask for money for the same thing in Durban. We might not
>> get the desired response if we're viewed as just pushing pushing all the
>> time on this. And if we start making multiple regular budget requests for
>> conferences, I suspect things could get more difficult. To me, it'd make
>> more sense to make one patently 'reasonable' request per year, which is to
>> do a conference as part of the annual meeting.
>>
>>
>> - I worry that we might overplay our hand with Fast Track Requests if
>> we ask for Durban money and lose out elsewhere. Robin already has Fast
>> Track Requests she's planning on submitting today for NCSG EC travel to
>> meetings, NCSG brochures and communiques per meeting, and NCSG travel to
>> the IGF. In parallel, I'm submitting for NCUC brochures and travel to the
>> IGF. Plus we are submitting SG and UC replies to the GNSO Tool Kit
>> Services survey asking for new money for webcasts, wiki support, record
>> keeping and member data base…So we're hitting them with a lot of requests,
>> and while the amounts aren't large perceptions may be, plus they'll be
>> getting many other requests from across the community at the same time to
>> divide up a fixed Fast Track pie. I would be pissed if we got turned down
>> on expenses that might really raise our profile among new audiences and get
>> new members, like the IGF workshops I mentioned and the brochure, because
>> we also asked for $ for Durban.
>>
>>
>> - I am somewhat skeptical that we actually have the capacity to be
>> constantly organized policy conferences. SF and Toronto took a good deal
>> of time, Beijing planning is just inching forward with just two weeks to
>> go, and there are other drains on our respective ICANN bandwidth
>> allocations, such as the constituency building effort. Once a year I think
>> we can do and do well, the other meetings we can ask for a workshop in the
>> main program like we have now. Seems like enough to me.
>>
>>
>> - *In the particular case of Durban, if we're really pumped to do
>> something outreach oriented, we probably can do it without an all day
>> conference with ICANN support. If we work with the APC folks we could try
>> to organize a meeting with African civil society off site, it'd not be hard
>> as they have a big presence there. Maybe something in the afternoon with a
>> work component and then an evening social component...*
>>
>>
>> - And even if you all disagree with me and really want to ask for
>> Durban money, here's the thing: I just found out we'd have to request it
>> today, and I have absolutely no idea what I'd be asking for, which
>> conference logistic components funded at what levels etc. I've had zero
>> interaction with staff on these matters previous, and being eight hours
>> ahead of California am not going to be able to get trained up by Robin
>> (who's probably in bed at the moment) before going out for the evening in a
>> few hours (other commitments, life). I can get out the FT Requests I'd
>> planned on, but realistically cannot pump out a credible Durban request
>> today. So the only way it could be done is if Robin submitted it on behalf
>> of NCUC. Personally, I'm not persuaded that'd be a good idea, and would
>> rather hold for Buenos Aires and a regular budget request in April.
>>
>> Thoughts, please?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Beijing2013 mailing list
>> Beijing2013 at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beijing2013
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Finance mailing list
>> Finance at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/finance
>>
>>
>> **********************************************************
>> William J. Drake
>> International Fellow & Lecturer
>> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>> University of Zurich, Switzerland
>> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
>> ICANN, www.ncuc.org
>> william.drake at uzh.ch
>> www.williamdrake.org
>> ***********************************************************
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ncuc-ec mailing list
>> Ncuc-ec at lists.ncuc.org
>> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-ec
>>
>>
>
> **********************************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
> Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
> University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
> ICANN, www.ncuc.org
> william.drake at uzh.ch
> www.williamdrake.org
> ***********************************************************
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-ec/attachments/20130610/c9afff0d/attachment.html>
More information about the NCUC-EC
mailing list