Proposed modification of NCSG Strategic Review Working Group

[Tomslin Samme-Nlar]

Thanks for this Farzi.

You're absolutely right, Renata did a splendid job with outreach and that
contributed significantly to my involvement in NCSG. However, I also want
to say even after I had that knowledge of how to get involved from the
outreach, it still felt like (and was) an overwhelming effort was required
to get up to speed and contribute substantially. It was only after I
figured out what I'll gain from the involvment (in my case intellectual
gain) that I truly began putting the effort required and I believe this
goes back to your first point.

Regarding the question of just asking people to tell why they don't engage,
I believe Bruna and Louise did some work on this before and if I am
not mistaken, the response rate was very low as well. If getting feedback
from folks is itself that challenging, then I think we'll need some good
"outside the box" ways to identify what the issues are and solutions to
them.

A question to think about is whether the forwarding of emails with no word
about how to get engaged which you alluded to, is a symptom of an
overworked few or simply bad leadership.

Cheers,
Tomslin


On Wed., 28 Oct. 2020, 04:28 farzaneh badii, <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Bruna,
>
> Sorry this is off topic but since we are still discussing why people don't
> engage, I'd like to give you some background. Though you have your own
> valuable experience, it might help. We can also start another thread.
>
> People can be inactive at ICANN and NCSG for the following reasons:
> 1. they don't know what will come off it.
> 2. DNS and ICANN work is not an important part of Internet governance
> anymore. People want to do exciting stuff and not work on such a narrow
> field. We should just accept that.
> 3.They don't know where to start from.
> These are what come to my mind. But I wonder why we are guessing, how
> about we just ask people why they don't engage!
>
> One thing that is crucial which Renata did so well was to encourage new
> people to get involved by working on little tasks that doesn't take a lot
> of their time. Renata's outreach skills and work were effective and
> excellent. Yes we had perhaps too many outreach sessions  but because of
> her work we have active members like you, Tomslin, Shahul and others that
> contribute regularly.
>
> Another issue is to tell people how they can get engaged. Forwarding
> emails with no word about how they can get engaged or what the email even
> means, is like sending busy people a piece in cuneiform asking them to
> contribute. I know you might use google translate nowadays for anything,
> but we need to decrease the transaction costs of volunteering and increase
> its benefit so that people can engage.
>
> Mentorship, talking to interested NCSG members one-on-one  and asking them
> what they want to work on are some other suggestions.
>
> And again we should remember that NCSG is a voluntary group working on a
> really narrow issue that can be less exciting. Voting doesn't cost people
> too much. Doing a ton of work for a voluntary group should be goal oriented
> and people should know what they will achieve (intellectual achievements
> are harder to sell, I admit). Having people become members and not be
> active is normal even in very important fields. Just like the elections,
> where some people's civic participation is limited to voting and a minority
> actively campaign for someone and engage in debates. But we need to revive
> the minority of volunteers at NCSG and I am sure that we can achieve that
> under your leadership.
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 10:29 AM Bruna Martins dos Santos <
> bruna.mrtns at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello NCSG,
>>
>> In light of the discussions hosted on both NCUCs and NCSGs open meetings
>> at ICANN69, @Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com> and
>> myself worked on some amendments to the proposed charter for the Strategic
>> Review Working Group.
>>
>> The charter can be found here:
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/19IZOoZVn-SmvZ2peYYULmQ6dTNAMEjb63jWCtOmGCJc/edit
>>
>> And, in case any of you is still interested in joining these efforts,
>> please email @Raphaël Beauregard-Lacroix <rbeauregardlacroix at gmail.com>,
>> Maryam, @Brenda Brewer <brenda.brewer at icann.org> or myself.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Bruna Santos
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 12:27 PM Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Based on our discussion today during the ICANN meeting, I would propose
>>> to modify the Working Group charter to say this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The task of the Working Group will be to explore the issues raised by an
>>> attempt to merge the two constituencies into an integrated Noncommercial
>>> Stakeholder Group. The group will conduct a thorough fact-finding operation
>>> to address:
>>>
>>> 1. Whether or not double constituencies creates duplicate administrative
>>> work
>>>
>>> 2. The impact of a merger on ICANN travel support and other resource
>>> availability
>>>
>>> 3. The charter changes that would have to be made to implement a merger
>>>
>>> 4. Whether diverse policy perspectives would be reduced by a merger
>>>
>>> 5. Any other relevant issues related to a merger it uncovers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dr. Milton L Mueller
>>>
>>> Georgia Institute of Technology
>>>
>>> School of Public Policy
>>>
>>> [image: IGP_logo_gold block]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Bruna Martins dos Santos *
>>
>> Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
>> @boomartins
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20201028/d3daf379/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18434 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-discuss/attachments/20201028/d3daf379/attachment.png>