Hello Fred, First, thanks for your answer. Second, I fully understand your comments and I feel some concern between the lines. I could not agree more. I will be brave and say something as a member of the RSSAC Caucus Membership committee. As you know every candidate to the Caucus has to make/send a SOI. If we check those SOIs all of them contain at least one of the following words (not poiting anybody): - Collaboratively - Willing to spend time/hours on RSSAC tasks - Collaborate in person or email - Attend calls - Help RSSAC * - Etc, etc, many similar adjetives to the above The previous words were taken from the following section that are in every SOI [1]: • Motivation for membership in the Caucus • Indication of availability One more time, if you (all of us) check the SOIs probably every person has the time and the willingness of helping. I really don't understand why some people do not step in when something like this is needed. Should we (Caucus/Staff/Chairs) check some member's SOIs and contact that person directly? Thanks, Alejandro, [1] https://community.icann.org/display/RSI/RSSAC+Caucus+Statements+of+Interest PS. As a final comment, sorry to talk in first person, I'm not stepping in because so far I'm in another WP, Nomcom liason and as I said RSSAC Caucus Membership committe. El 19/3/19 a las 11:58, Fred Baker escribió:
I think the point of Lars' email is that since the work party hasn't managed to find a leader, the work hasn't started. Given a leader, the statement of work can be changed accordingly. The RSSAC would indeed like the work done, but Lars is still looking for a leader.
One of the issues that RSSAC has had with caucus involvement is the lack of a response or involvement in projects, which often means that the work is only done by one or two - or none.
On Mar 19, 2019, at 1:19 AM, Alejandro Acosta <alejandro@lacnic.net> wrote:
Hello Lars, nice to tell you hello,
I was going to ask about some timeline of the project, I mean, starting date, due dates, final, etc when I noticed in your attached document it says:
"Final draft submitted to the RSSAC no later than 2019-03-31. Submission prior to the deadline is welcome"
Also the document is dated: 07 August, 2018
Is all the above right?, have you restarted the dates?
Thanks,
Alejandro,
El 18/3/19 a las 10:50, Lars-Johan Liman escribió:
Dear Caucus members,
Last year, ICANN staff helped conducting a survey in the caucus, which among other things asked for suggested work items that the caucus saw as prioritised. One item high on the list was service coverage for the root service. In response to that we've tried to spin up a work party to work with the issue. A (low) number of caucus members have signed up for it, but my call for a volunteer work party leader among the volunteers has gone unanswered.
I hereby make one last attempt in the wider caucus community for someone to step forward to lead the work on service coverage.
I intend to bring up this WP at the caucus meeting in Prague coming Sunday. With some luck we have a WP leader by then. If not, we'll discuss how to proceed ... or not?
To refresh your memories, I append the statement of work and scope for the WP.
Best regards, /Lars-Johan Liman
_______________________________________________ rssac-caucus mailing list
rssac-caucus@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus
rssac-caucus mailing list rssac-caucus@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus