BC Members Comments at the mike in the Public Forum in Prague 28th June 2012. Balancing the capacity of Volunteers and ICANN staff
AYESHA HASSAN: THANK YOU. AYESHA HASSAN FROM THE INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. THE STRENGTH AND CREDIBILITY OF THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES DEPEND ON REAL SUBSTANTIVE INPUT FROM A RANGE OF STAKEHOLDERS' EXPERIENCE, EXPERTISE, AND VIEWS. THE RISK IS THAT WHEN HIGH DEMANDS ON THE COMMUNITY TO COMMENT AND CONTRIBUTE ARE TOO HIGH, IT ENDANGERERS THIS BROAD STAKEHOLDER PARTICIPATION AND OFTEN MEANS THAT THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT RESOURCES OR FINANCIAL OR OTHER INTERESTS CANNOT OR JUST DO NOT CONTRIBUTE, WHICH NARROWS THE PARTICIPATION IN THE POLICY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. I SEE THIS FIRSTHAND AT ICC AND THE WORK THAT WE TRY TO DO TO CONTRIBUTE AT ICANN AS WELL. AS WE WORK TO GET MORE INPUT INTO THE PROCESS, AND THE HIGH DEMAND UNDERMINES THE GOAL, I WOULD BE INTERESTED TO HEAR IF THE BOARD HAS SPECIFIC IDEAS FOR HOW TO ADDRESS THIS. I HEARD THOMAS ROESSLER's POINT THAT A CANDID PRIORITIES DISCUSSION COULD BE ONE WAY TO START ADDRESSING SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT ARE BEING DISCUSSED UNDER THIS AGENDA ITEM. I'D JUST BE INTERESTED TO KNOW IF YOU'VE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS IN A WAY THAT -- SPECIFICALLY TO ENSURE THAT THE DIVERSITY OF STAKEHOLDER INPUT IS PRESERVED IN THIS PROCESS. THANKS.
STEVE DelBIANCO: THANK YOU. STEVE DelBIANCO WITH THE BUSINESS CONSTITUENCY. I SERVE THERE AS THE VICE CHAIR FOR POLICY COORDINATION. THAT'S THE TITLE WE DESIGNED FOR THAT ROLE. BUT IT'S NOT COORDINATION AS MUCH AS IT IS COERCION TO TRY TO GET VOLUNTEERS WITHIN THE BC WHO, LIKE YOU, HAVE DAY JOBS, FULL DAY JOBS. AND GETTING THEM TO TRY TO ALLOCATE ENOUGH TIME TO BE -- TO BE ATTENTIVE TO A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD OR WORKING GROUPS. AND THE BC DOES A GREAT JOB PARTICIPATING IN A LOT OF PLACES, BUT THERE AREN'T ENOUGH OF US WITH ENOUGH TIME TO GO AROUND. SO WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THE TITLE FROM "VICE CHAIR OF POLICY COORDINATION FOR VICE CHAIR OF POLICY CONSCRIPTION. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FORCE PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED BUT I DON'T HAVE A LOT OF HOPE FOR THAT. BUT I HAVE THREE SUGGESTIONS. STEVE, YOU MENTIONED THE NOTION OF RIGHT-LIMITING AND YOU USED THE METAPHOR WITH RESPECT TO THE DELEGATION RATE. JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THE PUBLIC COMMENTS. THERE ARE 14 OPEN RIGHT NOW. IF -- LET'S PLEASE EXPLORE AN IDEA OF LIMITING THAT. PICK A NUMBER. PICK A NUMBER. 10? NO MORE THAN 10 CAN OCCUR AT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIODS. AND IF YOU HAVE 11, 12, 13, AND 14 READY TO GO THEY MIGHT HAVE WAIT UNTIL THE FIRST ONE PEELS OFF THE LIST. IT MIGHT BE A SIMPLE THING TO TRY. WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
BILL SMITH: BILL SMITH, PAYPAL. SO I WAS STRUCK BY TWO WORDS THAT I'VE HEARD HER, TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY. AND I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE BOTH OF THEM, OR AT LEAST ONE OF THEM, TRANSPARENCY. I HOPE WE CAN GET MORE TRUST. AND WE HAVE TO HAVE BOTH TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY, BOTH IN THE ORGANIZATION AND IN THE PROCESSES. THERE IS A FACT, I THINK, THAT WE ARE IGNORING, PERHAPS, IN THIS DISCUSSION. THIS IS A HIERARCHAL ORGANIZATION AND AS A CONSEQUENCE, WHEN WE TAKE DECISIONS AT HIGH LEVELS, THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS, AS THE ORGANIZATION GROWS, COVERS MORE TERRITORY, ARE GOING TO HAVE TO REVIEW MORE AND MORE AND MORE. SO AS THE -- THE ORGANIZATION CONTINUES TO GROW, THAT'S JUST -- THAT PROBLEM IS JUST GOING TO GET WORSE. THERE HAVE BEEN SUGGESTIONS TO LIMIT PAGES, NUMBER OF REVIEWS, DOCUMENTS, ET CETERA. I'LL EXCLUDE MYSELF FROM THIS COMMENT. WE'RE ALL INTELLIGENT PEOPLE HERE AND WE WILL FIND WAYS AROUND ANYTHING -- ANY RATE-LIMITING THAT IS PUT IN PLACE.
I'M SURE ALL OF YOU KNOW ABOUT SMALL FONTS. THAT'S A WAY TO JAM STUFF IN -- YOU KNOW, INTO PAGES. IT'S NOT GOING TO LIMIT THE STUFF THAT ANY OF US HAVE TO READ AND REVIEW. SO I SUGGEST WE NEED TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE -- AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH, AND THAT IS TO -- TO USE TRUST AND TRANSPARENCY TO OUR -- TO GREATER EFFECT. AND THAT IS TO ENTRUST PEOPLE AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF THE ORGANIZATION, OR TO FLATTEN THE ORGANIZATION AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO MAKE REAL PROGRESS AND POTENTIALLY DECISIONS IN AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT MANNER. OTHERWISE, WE WILL CONTINUE TO HAVE 700 OR A THOUSAND PAGES THAT HAVE TO BE REVIEWED AT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF OUR MEETINGS. AND WE'RE HEARING FROM PEOPLE RIGHT HERE THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK GOING FORWARD. WE MUST CHANGE. OKAY? SO LET'S -- LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT, AS OPPOSED TO, WELL, HOW DO WE MAINTAIN THE CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, MAKE IT SO ALL THE DECISIONS HAPPEN, YOU KNOW, AT RELATIVELY HIGH LEVELS. FIND A DIFFERENT WAY. WE REALLY NEED TO DO THAT.