On 9 June 2013 10:36, <gbruen@knujon.com> wrote:
It's up to the poster to define relevance
And if the poster won't, the Chair must -- or declare the topic out of order. Maybe one of these days something actually to do with ICANN policy -- rather than out-of-scope "hey look at this" postings and inactive participants passing judgement over active ones -- will actually be discussed here. This is not a general purpose Internet Governance list, and never was. Nor is it run by Jerry Springer or Joseph McCarthy. It's easy to bitch an moan about Outreach. But this is not just about resources, it's about what we ourselves do to lead by example, to show how welcoming and effective the existing participants are. An outsider's quick perusal of this list of late offers no incentive for someone to join, just a cacophony of irrelevancy and McCarthyism. All the fancy brochures in the world can't mask a record of inaction related to the actual reason we're supposed to be here. Now... to try to get things even partially on back on track, I recall NARALO attention to a letter, signed by myself and a number of other At-Large members, including Garth, that has been submitted to the ATRT2<http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-atrt2-02apr13/pdfDPSDz7WTEO.pdf>. At the last NARALO face to face letter it was suggested that perhaps NARALO as a body may want to endorse it. I would like to raised the issue again, with perhaps a vote or consensus on the matter at the next meeting. - Evan PS: Please come back, John. It's not all dysfunctional.