Thanks Avri. Chuck Chuck Gomes ----- Original Message ----- From: owner-council@gnso.icann.org <owner-council@gnso.icann.org> To: Council GNSO <council@gnso.icann.org> Sent: Sat Sep 05 19:33:54 2009 Subject: [council] Fwd: Assignment of NCAs I was encouraged to forward this on from a semi private conversation. Begin forwarded message:
From: Avri Doria <avri@acm.org> Date: 4 September 2009 15:26:38 EDT Subject: Re: Assignment of NCAs
Hi,
I have a few views.
1. the best of all possible worlds is that the NCAs pick. I do not think it really mater that one is new. I think that the 2 current ones can have a conversation explain the lay of the land and then between them figure it out. One of the things we have figured out is that the NCAs need to work together in order to cover everything. i.e while they do not have the same viewpoints or the same affinities as those in the constituencies/SG, the amount of work is the same. The only way they can survive is to share. So day 1 is a good time to start - this should happen anyway. Also we can not assume that everyone enters as a tabla rasa.
2. I still like the idea of having NCAs serve in all houses with them rotating through the houses annually or semi annually, bringing the understanding that is lacking of the other houses with them. As was spoken of and seen in the last meeting, there are many fierce animosities in the GNSO that are barely kept in check. It has always been thus. The NCAs can help to bridge these somewhat merely by moving from house to house to houseless.
3. The reason someone is appointed is to contribute. As much as possible that should be from day one. Yeah it is hard, but i guess people should know that coming in. Why volunteer otherwise. It is not glamorous, is often painful, and there are very few rewards for anyone who does not find their reward in doing a job they think worth the time as well as they can. It is easier to contribute as part of a group whether it is constituency, sg or house as there are group dynamics that carry one alone. As a lone NCA without a vote and nothing but ones understanding and ability to speak to the issues to aid them in contribution will require experience. That is why I suggest that the longest in the council should be the loner. To be so isolated with no vote and nothing to do but watch for a year trying to get a word in edgewise would seem to be to be rather debilitating. Just think of what is like to move to new place and be all alone and relatively irrelevant for a year. That is what it would be like.
One question came in on this was whether I considered Alan irrelevant because he had no vote. I responded:
Alan is a case for my argument. He is experienced and knows what to do. He doesn't need a vote. Besides he has ALAC behind him. My point is, a newbie who knew nothing about the GNSO and council working would be at a loss and since they did not even have the obligation of voting to force them to get up to speed, I expect that most would just sit quietly in the corner and feel lost.
In truth and in reconsidering what I wrote, I must admit, that even as a homeless newbie, I would have probably done everything possible to get up to speed and then gotten vocal vote or no vote. But not everyone is as shy and retiring as I am. Most people need some group environment to feel able to contribute. Then again, the council could put in its requirements - brash and outspoken people are desired. Just my 2 euro. a.