Hold us accountable

[Ayden Férdeline]

Raoul,

The NCSG does do outreach. Farzaneh has coordinated outreach events at every ICANN meeting where she has been the NCSG Chair, she has gone to great efforts to coordinate panels at external events, and she has recruited a number of high calibre members for the NCSG's various constituencies. Yes, the constituencies also do outreach, but so too does the NCSG, and it does so on a different scale.

As for the membership management tool not working, it was procured by the previous NCSG Chair who did not keep us updated on its development and did not seek nor welcome membership input on its features. It is still not clear to me how the firm which was chosen to develop this tool was selected. Some of us did ask throughout the lifecycle of its development what we were getting -- for instance, Stephanie and I asked the NCSG Chair at time, Tapani Tarvainen, on a [June 2017 Finance Committee call](https://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind1706&L=NCSG-DISCUSS&P=R157739) what we were getting for our money.

So if that tool isn't working and it's now delaying the review of membership applications, that's something we should talk about -- beginning with a discussion around how the vendor to develop that tool was chosen.

Ayden

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On 10 July 2018 8:04 PM, Raoul Plommer <plommer at GMAIL.COM> wrote:

>> It is outrageous that the NCUC Chair would seek to put pressure on you to approve applications for membership who do not fulfil our membership criteria. We are here to defend non-commercial uses and users of the Domain Name System, and must be careful not to allow those who do not support a free and open Internet to use our platform in order to push different priorities.
>
> Ayden, I think it's pretty far from outrageous, that a constituency chair is asking about the status of membership applications that were filled months ago. I understand the frustration even more when it's not so much NCSG that does the outreach, but its constituencies. Especially Renata has brought more members to the NCSG than anyone else, as far as I know and having too many member applications is definitely a positive problem. But I'm not so concerned about the approval of new members as treating our current ones - the NCSG chair kicking out a selected member from the NCUC EC mailing list without consulting the EC chair (or anyone else in EC) is a lot worse in my eyes and shows open disregard for good protocol and due process.
>
> But yeah, back to member candidates, usually the delay doesn't come from denying GAC members or IGOs who might actually have very different viewpoints for internet, but from trying to get an answer from authentic applicants on making noncommercial DNS policy.
>
> More often than not with unclear motives, we actually have to ask how they would be contributing in making DNS policy. On top of that, we've had serious problems with a broken registry for new members as well as the scheduling meetings and coordinating the ~unanimous approval of members between all five members of the EC in very different time zones. So it's not all that easy even when the registry is working, which it still isn't.
>
> The NCSG EC members have decided to ask for some clarifications on a good few member applications but by no means should we let all the approved candidates wait for those requests to be filled. This could be improved quite easily, at least once the registry is working again.
>
> -Raoul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20180711/b15e3d05/attachment.htm>