[governance] Fixing an ICANN problem

[Roland Perry]

In message <202486.82478.qm at web110113.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>, at 05:38:29 
on Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Danny Younger <dannyyounger at yahoo.com> writes
>ICANN recently published a study of constituency participation in 
>working group activities -- see 
>http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg07806.html
>
>The attendance rosters paint a very sad picture -- two constituencies 
>in particular (the ISPs and the NCUC) had no member participation 
>whatsoever in several working groups:
>
>Registration Abuse Policies WG

If I could stick my head above the parapet here.... I participate as an 
individual, but if I had to name a constituency (which I don't think is 
compulsory) the NCUC would be the one. [I've discussed this in the past 
with Milton, without ever actually joining it formally].

>When some constituencies fail to participate at the working group level 
>it is almost inevitable that whatever recommendations emerge will be 
>skewed as a result of imbalanced input -- clearly this is not a healthy 
>situation.
>
>On this list are many veterans of the ICANN process.  What suggestions 
>might you offer to improve this overall situation?

It's a lot of work, you need to find people to encourage and support 
you.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance