<div dir="ltr">I agree with Klaus that “broad stakeholder engagement” is needed. I have attempted to discuss ICANN with my colleagues (independent/community media producers and communications academics) but hit a wall of glazed-over eyes when trying to explain the importance of DNS regulation. <div>I was surprised at the recently expressed hostility towards Net Mundial. At the very least the Brazilian initiative was a successfully wide-reaching example of a global discussion of internet governance via historic use of technology for interactive exchange. <br></div><div>One obvious problem in “non-commercial” participation is the lack of adequate support for the cost of face to face participation. Of course commercial entities can afford to ensure their strong involvement! How can civil society representatives become more than the ignored token 1%? That is the question. </div><div><br></div><div>The burgeoning ICANN budget has increased ICANN staff (certainly an incentive that lead to the opening of more domains) but has not enabled more non-commercial (and diverse) participation. </div><div><br></div><div>Even if I had the frequent flier miles to get to Marrakech, how could I afford the posh hotels available? </div><div>DeeDee</div><div><div><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 5:39 AM, Klaus Stoll <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kdrstoll@gmail.com" target="_blank">kdrstoll@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">Dear Niels<br>
<br>
You asked:<br>
</font>
<pre><font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace"><big><span class="">"Isn't this ecactly what the civil society engagement strategy is for? I
think that's exactly what the board will answer as well."
</span><b>My answer to this is simply that the present ICANN civil Siciety engagement strategy is misguided and is in need of urgent correction. I can not go into details here but </b><b>basically</b><b>:</b> </big>
</font></pre>
<font face="Courier New, Courier, monospace">
<br>
<font size="4"><b></b></font><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">ICANN's needs broad
Stakeholder engagement</font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">. The
vast majority of Internet ecosystem citizens are not present
as
engaged stakeholders </font></font></b><b>
</b><b></b><b><font size="4"><i>resulting in </i></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><i><span style="font-weight:normal"></span></i></font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><i>dangers
of under- and miss- representation</i></font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><span style="font-style:normal">. Existing barriers and </span></font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><span lang="en-US"><span style="font-style:normal">challenges</span></span></font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><span style="font-style:normal">
to broad stakeholder engagement</span></font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><span style="font-style:normal">
</span></font></font></b><b>
</b><b>are: </b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">a.
ICANN centricity resulting in lack of relevance, </font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">b)
Staff centred strategy,</font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"><span style="font-weight:normal"> </span></font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">c)
unsuitable materials and language, </font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">d) a lack
of understanding volunteers realities and needs.</font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"> To overcome
the barriers</font></font></b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"> we need to reverse the
roles between ICANN staff and ICANN’s constituency
organizations.</font></font></b><b><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"> we need to create relevance of internet
governance for all users through the creation of win/win
situations. This can be achieved if we make </font></b><b><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4">the DNS the focus</font></b><b>
of outreach not ICANN as a organization.</b><b><font color="#000000"><font style="font-size:14pt" size="4"> To get
the process started we need a communications plan that
is focused on process and outcomes.<br>
<br>
There is much to do and much to discuss with the board.
Happy to provide more information on this and ask the
question at the event.<br>
<br>
Yours<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
Klaus<br>
</font></span></font></font></b>
</font><div><div class="h5">
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%"><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0in;line-height:100%"><br>
</p>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 2/29/2016 5:19 AM, Niels ten Oever
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Hi all,
On 02/29/2016 08:38 AM, Klaus Stoll wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Dear Friends
I think Milton is spot on with this:
On 2/28/2016 10:29 PM, Mueller, Milton L wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Tapani
As a veteran of many of these sessions, I want us to avoid wasting time and just generating animosity.
I would strongly encourage us to ask questions that:
a) are forward-looking, and give us an opportunity to shape agendas and perceptions on things that are not already finished
b) involve requests for things that the board or staff could actually deliver for us
Any ideas about that?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>For this reason I would like to propose a question on if the Board
agrees on the need for greater "Awareness and Capacity Building for
Broader and Deeper Engagement in ICANN Policy and for a Secure and
Stable DNS", and if yes, what are the parameters under which this should
be implemented.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>Isn't this ecactly what the civil society engagement strategy is for? I
think that's exactly what the board will answer as well.
Cheers,
Niels
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>Yours
Klaus
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>E.g., is there are request we can make regarding the RDS (Whois) process that would position us better?
Are there any requests regarding the implementation process for the CCWG recommendations that will help us make sure things don't go off track? Are there any committees that we can ask to be on?
Can we ask them about the impending GNSO review and whether they agreed with our assessment of the biased Westlake report? Things of that sort
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre>-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss [<a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>] On Behalf Of
Tapani Tarvainen
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 6:10 AM
To: <a href="mailto:NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU" target="_blank">NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU</a>
Subject: Questions to the Board?
Dear all,
One regular event at ICANN meetings is that we get to meet the Board, talk
with them about and ask them whatever we want.
The Board would, however, like to know in advance what we're going to ask
them, so they could better prepare for it.
If you have suggestions for topics for our meeting with the Board in
Marrakech, please let me know as soon as possible (feel free to post to the list
or me directly, as you prefer).
Thank you,
--
Tapani Tarvainen
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre>.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre></pre>
</blockquote>
<pre></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div><a href="http://www.deepdishwavesofchange.org" target="_blank">http://www.deepdishwavesofchange.org</a></div></div>
</div>