Summary Comments on the Discussion Concerning consolidating NCSG, NCUC and NPOC

[Sam Lanfranco]

	NCSG, NCUC & NPOC Colleagues, 

	I would like to express my thanks for the discussion that followed my
deliberately provocative posting on possible futures for those of us
working in the troika. This is my summary statement for now.  

	The discussion was rich and insightful with some deep-felt positions
agreeing that we could restructure to do better. Collectively we are
administratively top heavy. We are persistently short of volunteers to
cover our role in the core work of ICANN (policy development, document
review, etc.). Our recruitment of active and engaged membership has been
wanting. 

	Given the size of the global civil society and non-profit sectors our
recruitment efforts, independently and working with ICANN, have been of
weak success. This is as serious an issue at two levels. One is the
shortage of engaged members for the core work of ICANN. The other is the
weight of our voice within ICANN. 

	In this discussion one colleague said that NPOC is the “Voice of the
non-profit sector”. No. NPOC cannot claim that any more than NCUC can
claim that it is the voice of non-commercial users.  We are hearty bands of
volunteers who, to the best of our ability, voice the concerns of
non-commercial users and the non-profit sector. We have no formal
accountability and base our efforts on our best intentions. For example, my
NPOC position comes from the Canadian Society for International Health
(CSIH) NPOC membership. CSIH was once concerned about abuse around health
gTLDs. They are no longer concerned, I am no longer formally accountable,
and I should shift to individual NCSG membership.  

	ICANN needs us as a legitimate part of its multistakeholder model. While
we are representatives FROM our constituencies, without formal
accountability we are not representatives OF our constituencies.  

	The good work of those who volunteer for policy development, elected
positions, and other ICANN tasks bolster mainly individual reputations and
standings within ICANN. The weight of the troika’s voice within ICANN, as
the troika, rests on the breadth and depth of our membership, and we are
weak there.  

	I would hope that as part of our work agenda for 2020-2021 we have an
ongoing discussion and look at structural changes that increase member
engagement in ICANN work, reduce troika administrative work, and enhance
the attractiveness of membership from our global constituencies.  

	Lastly, I would like to than Milton and others for correcting me when I
got parts of the early organizational history wrong. 
	Sam Lanfranco
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20200806/957947de/attachment.htm>