I agree completely. Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-6531 Fax: (867) 979-8870 dthompson@gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: Evan Leibovitch [mailto:evan@telly.org] Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 10:35 AM To: Thompson, Darlene; na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Action Items Thompson, Darlene wrote:
I would definitely approve something like that. I've just been on too many boards that have been rendered ineffective by people/groups going AWAL so that quorum can never be reached.
I agree, but in my brief time here I've seen that silence is frequently interpreted very wrong, and that the processes to date have been so muddy and confusing that it's sometimes hard to keep track of where an actual vote or opinion is required. The traffic on this mailing list is certainly more chaotic than I'm used to, for a decision-making body. Have a look at the last few week's worth of emails and try to figure out how often a consensus has been called for (notably meeting dates, places or methods). Here we are, some time after the original mail calling us to Yonkers, and it appears we need a meeting to figure out how and where to do the meeting. :-P As I said earlier, I don't want to have situations in which silence can be mistaken for a point of view. The combination of a reasonably high participant percentage AND the three-no-shows removal provisions ensure that the RALO makes the effort to _solicit_ opinions from the ALSs that have made an effort to be here. Sometimes, as I've found out myself, lack of input more often indicates confusion than indifference. I ask the staff and old-timers here to keep in mind that some of us -- especially the newer and smaller ones -- don't have the cycles to hang on every word, every operational detail, and that our portal to ICANN is what we have here. Give us the background information sufficient to work with (or at least form a basis for further research if needed), have some discussion, get our POV, and move on to the next. Also: Like Darlene, I am concerned about any proposal which involves judgement calls on the "quality" of a group's participation. If an ALS does nothing more than agree or disagree with proposals on the table, it's still fulfilling its role. Not everyone has the time for the shenanigans that appear to pass here for debate. - Evan