[NCSG-PC] GNSO Outreach

Martin Pablo Silva Valent mpsilvavalent at gmail.com
Mon Dec 11 22:38:03 EET 2017


I like it because it's a different approach to try tackle a heavy concern
we have been dealing since forever without an obvious answer.
It would not only be an opportunity to tackle the silos within the gnso,
but also outside of it.
Newcomers barely understand the icann and gnso structure, much less
procedures. It will be good that, not only  the regular ngo or academics
see and listen to us, but also other stakeholders we wouldn't normally
reach. That give us both a broader outreach and improves the legitimacy of
our work.

As an experiment I am up for it. We can still do communication targeting
non commercial people for them to come and join.

Of course, I would support any way you feel is best,but if we were to
experiment on all gnso format, I am comfortable as well.

Cheers,
Martin

On 11 Dec 2017 16:03, "Dr. Tatiana Tropina" <t.tropina at mpicc.de> wrote:

> I am of two minds about this,
>
> while I certainly agree with Ayden's arguments -- I think we might give it
> a go and see how it turns out.  Many of those attending our outreach still
> don't understand that we are a part of GNSO, what GNSO is doing, how do we
> participate in the dynamics -- so we always still show only a piece of the
> puzzle. This does create confusion especially for the newcomers -- to show
> what policy is about we might want to show what GNSO is doing as a whole,
> what the SGs and houses are, why are we a part of it, how it is connected
> to the fact that we have a narrow mission, how we fit a bigger picture.
>
> So I would be in favour to give it a go. I remember before our experiment
> in Copenhagen with Euralo there were also arguments that we are sharing the
> prime time, but it worked well. We won't know until we try.
>
> However, back to Ayden's arguments - if it's less than 2,5 - 3 hours
> outreach, I would rather be a bit skeptic.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tanya
>
>
>
> On 11/12/17 19:18, Ayden FĂ©rdeline wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> My initial reaction is: I prefer doing our outreach as a stakeholder
> group; it gives us a full 90 minutes or so to emphasise our values and to
> shine to newcomers. If we do it as the GNSO, we are sharing the spotlight,
> have a reduced amount of time, and might have to watch our words,
> particularly on issues where we do not have a common position. We could get
> into a situation where we have to be on the defense? Plus, in reality, we
> do exist in silos...
>
> However I look forward to hearing what others think on this issue.
>
> Ayden
>
> Sent from ProtonMail Mobile
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 05:02, farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Dear PC
>
> I thought it might be better to do an outreach as GNSO in ICANN 61, saves
> us the clash with GNSO council meetings and shows people the dynamics of
> the group instead of making them understand GNSO in silos.
>
> What do you think? Heather is in favor of it and I will have to talk CPH
> into it.
>
> Best
>
>
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing listNCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.ishttps://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NCSG-PC mailing list
> NCSG-PC at lists.ncsg.is
> https://lists.ncsg.is/mailman/listinfo/ncsg-pc
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncsg.is/pipermail/ncsg-pc/attachments/20171211/2c5bc2b8/attachment.html>


More information about the NCSG-PC mailing list