Hi all, I have to say, I supported a comment asking with full power and rights for metrics and the desire to see more connection between the program and the GNSO PDPs. I do not support a comment that is supposed to be high-level, without data, stating what this document states. This comment is not useful to develop an educational program that is built to both increase participation but also awareness and network at several level global. This program is a key part on ICANN legitimacy, we should take all the steps to improve it, not just jump to such a destructive comment. As it is, I cannot vote it in good conscious. Cheers, Martín
On 20 Mar 2018, at 17:55, Rafik Dammak <rafik.dammak@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Donna,
please find attached the word version of the comment presented last week and the background paper about the consultation.
Best,
Rafik
2018-03-20 19:59 GMT+00:00 Austin, Donna via council <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>>: Hi Ayden, all
I’m unable to find the beginning of this thread, the questionnaire and draft responses. Is it possible to have the original information resent to the council list.
Thanks
Donna
From: council [mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council-bounces@gnso.icann.org>] On Behalf Of Ayden Férdeline Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2018 9:37 AM To: Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma@gmail.com <mailto:arsenebaguma@gmail.com>> Cc: GNSO Council List <council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [council] On the Fellowship program
I would like to express my support for the questionnaire responses which were presented to the Council by Rafik yesterday.
Many thanks,
Ayden Férdeline
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 15 March 2018 3:50 PM, Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma@gmail.com <mailto:arsenebaguma@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi colleagues,
I am taking this opportunity to contribute to this draft as submitted by our colleagues. I would like to thank the small group for coming up with these answers. Please see bellow my comments and suggested edits.
As much as I see value for us, as a Council, to respond but I also think it would be difficult for us to agree on this as it would be difficult within the GNSO itself. But I will personally be okay with this draft after consideration has been taken of my bellow small comments.
- I don’t support the HL comments. I would suggest we delete that section and keep our responses based on the questions as requested by the call.
- On Q1: I think we are too demanding here. Though this looks good but I think we are going too far in terms of what we ask fellows to be able to do. I would like to suggest that the spirit of this paragraph be to mean that this is the ideal that we would like to see. I am sure many of us agree that “active and meaningful” participation in PDPs is not easy and it is a challenge, that even some of those who have been to ICANN for very long are failing to be “active and meaningful” participants? I don’t have the proper wording here but that’s what I would like to see reflected here.
- On Q4, I have the following comment: Not having fellowship alumni active in GNSO doesn’t mean they are not active elsewhere within ICANN. I believe if we check other SO/ACs, we will find maybe many of them active there. If we don’t have them active in the GNSO, maybe it is because we are failing in terms of outreach? Or we should review available learning materials (ICANN Learn, etc) and see whether they provide enough information for someone to decide to join the GNSO. Just thinking outloud here.
I would like to suggest an additional text:
We have to note however that some members of the Council started as fellows and many other alumni are active in our different SG/Cs but more work needs to be done to have many more active in our core business.
- On Q7, I don’t know what exactly we request on the last paragraph and would suggest we remove it: “It may also be advisable to interview candidates to ascertain their suitability for a fellowship”.
- On Q10: I don’t agree with this but would suggest the way around. Keep the fellowship as it is and push for an evaluation (on KPI) that will provide metrics. And only after that assessment, we can make an informed decision. The budget issue should not be put forward here because as we know, the Fellowship program does not cost that much to the organization, as said in many public comments on FY19.
- Q12: I don’t support this paragraph and would suggest the following:
“Many first time fellows we interact with are not enough knowledgeable regarding ICANN-related issues and in particular GNSO topics. This is understandable because it is their first participation at an ICANN meeting. Many of them are interested in important Internet governance issues that fall outside of ICANN’s remit. “
I would suggest we emphasize on the fact that what we find abnormal is when the same applies to returning fellows not to first time fellows.
- On Q13, I would like to suggest we add the text in bold: We are not aware of any Fellows actively attending in GNSO Council meetings but we have seen some attending SG/C meetings and ask questions, which is encouraging.
- On Q14: Not sure on the basis of what we said YES. Are we able as the Council to meet with the fellows? I think we should be clear on what we mean here.
Happy to provide clarification if needed.
Regards,
Arsene
------------------------
Co-Founder & Executive Director, Rudi international <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.rudiinternational.or...>,
CEO, Smart Services Sarl <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.smart-2Dserv.info&d=...>, Mabingwa Forum <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.mabingwa-2Dforum.com...> Tel: +243 993810967 <tel:+243%20993%20810%20967> GPG: 523644A0
Goma, Democratic Republic of Congo
2015 Mandela Washington Felllow <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__tungali.blogspot.com_201...> (YALI) - ISOC Ambassador (IGF Brazil <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.internetsociety.org_...> & Mexico <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.internetsociety.org_...>) - AFRISIG 2016 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__afrisig.org_afrisig-2D20...> - Blogger <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__tungali.blogspot.com&d=D...> - ICANN's GNSO Council <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gnso.icann.org_en_about...> Member. AFRINIC Fellow (Mauritius <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.afrinic.net_en_libra...>) - IGFSA Member <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.igfsa.org_&d=DwMGaQ&...> - Internet Governance - Internet Freedom.
Check the 2016 State of Internet Freedom in DRC report (English <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cipesa.org_-3Fwpfb-5Fdl-...>) and (French <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cipesa.org_-3Fwpfb-5Fdl-...>)
_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council>
<ICANN Fellowship Program Community Consultation .pdf><GNSO Council Comment - Fellowship Program at ICANN Community Consultation Process.docx>_______________________________________________ council mailing list council@gnso.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/council