Dominik, Time for a reality check. Take a moment and pop into the wasteland that the ALAC calls Working Groups. You will see almost no participation whatsoever and almost no discussion on anything even remotely related to policy concerns. This is the norm here, not the exception. So, do Civil Society folk have the ability to work on-line and get things done? I see plenty of evidence elsewhere that they can... I recall the IGOVAP Forum discussions that involved 180 members from 27 countries that generated 350 messages within a matter of a few short weeks. I see the steady ongoing involvement of many CS orgs on the cpsr governance list... and it's amazing how many of them (also ALS reps) regularly participate there, but not here. Ultimately, we have to ask ourselves who should be financially supported and why. I favor supporting those that make an effort to involve themselves in on-line policy working groups, who do the investigative work, who come up with findings that lead to recommendations. I support the notion of providing funding for their necessary intersessional face to face meetings to resolve any outstanding policy debates. I don't support spending money on those who during most of the year have nothing to say, who won't work in an on-line environment to get things done, and who seem to think that ICANN owes them travel funding just so that they can get together for a few days three times a year, pontificate and come up with "Me Too" Statements. For many years I have seen certain groups working hard, organizing workshops with expert commentators, presenting position papers, negotiating policy points with those who don't share their views -- and all without any funding from ICANN. Then I look at those who are budgeted at three-quarters of a million dollars or more and I'm appalled by the almost useless return on investment. For that kind of money anyone could hire a group akin to the Pew Charitable Trust to conduct wide-reaching global surveys of user views (if user views was all that we sought to obtain). But we should be expecting a lot more for that kind of financial outlay. At the very least we should be getting the type and quantity of documents produced by the SSAC detailing user concerns, findings and recommendations. Other Advisory Committees manage to get their work done in a straightforward and responsible fashion. This AC does not. The model is flawed and we keep pouring good money after bad down a rathole. In a statement posted by the registrar's constituency yesterday to the Budget Forum the question is asked: "How can you justify that the support for certain groups is disproportional with their contributions?" Apparently, I'm not the only one that holds such views. regards, Danny --- On Fri, 6/13/08, Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@dsoft.sk> wrote:
From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@dsoft.sk> Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] Summary Minutes NARALO Teleconference 09 June To: dannyyounger@yahoo.com, "At-Large Staff" <staff@atlarge.icann.org>, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> Cc: "Nick Ashton-Hart" <Nick.Ashton-Hart@icann.org>, "NA Discuss" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Friday, June 13, 2008, 11:26 AM Danny,
A bit sarky view ;-) The fact that the constituencies are doing a more visible work may be derived from its higher status and their organizational integration and stability. At-Large is still in progress and evolution having just advisory voice in result. Therefore I would not compare who deserves what. However, I have to agree with Evan in that after the consolidation At-Large, by its organizational nature and the overall public outreach it is intended to cover, will need more money than other much smaller constituencies. The consolidation, however, also means the promotion of At-Large to a body with voting right.
Dominik
-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny Younger Sent: Friday, June 13, 2008 4:53 PM To: At-Large Staff; Evan Leibovitch Cc: Nick Ashton-Hart; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Summary Minutes NARALO Teleconference 09 June
Evan,
You are at liberty to make the case that the at-large deserves more dollars than other constituent bodies. I would argue that those who do the work are to be rewarded, while those that accomplish almost nothing should receive almost nothing.
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists .icann.org
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------