One thing we can all say to ask that NCUC needs funding from ICANN to 
have an equal playing field on issues.  I think this might be a 
possibility these days - if we all push for it and soon.   In the draft 
operational plan, ALAC would get $330,000 in funding from ICANN for 
travel support alone.  That's terrific!   NCUC should be able to receive 
funds too.  It would be so great if we could regularly have all 3 
council members at ICANN board meetings as well as task force members.

Robin



Neal McBurnett wrote:

>On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 11:16:06AM -0500, Milton Mueller wrote:
>  
>
>>The survey is not bad. It hits on many of the key problems facing GNSO. They say it takes 10 minutes to take, but that's completely wrong unless you do a very superficial run through the Likert scales and just click numbers. If you make any comments to explain your ratings, it will take half an hour; given my vast and deep knowledge of GNSO and its history (not necessarily something to be proud of ;-) )  it took me an hour. 
>>
>>Despite that, I hope ALL member orgs take the survey -- especially those with experience on the GNSO Council. 
>>    
>>
>
>I agree that this survey is important.  It gives us a chance to take a
>big-picture view of GNSO, NCUC, ICANN etc, and have our views heard.
>
>They want responses soon!  By March 31st at 1:00 UTC.
>
>I haven't been very active recently - so much to do...., so I would
>love to see, either publically or privately, anyone else's comments or
>responses to any of the questions.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Neal McBurnett                 http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/
>Boulder Community Network, Boulder CO, US
>Signed and/or sealed mail encouraged.  GPG/PGP Keyid: 2C9EBA60
>  
>