The merger makes sense to me. I agree with the arguments put forward by those in favour.
J Restrepo
OISTE Foundation, Geneva
Sent from my iPhone
> On 25 Jul 2020, at 06:00, NCSG-DISCUSS automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> There are 5 messages totaling 1667 lines in this issue.
>
> Topics of the day:
>
> 1. A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in ICANN’s DNS
> Work (4)
> 2. Internet Gov Weekly Brief (W30A20): US-China cyber-diplomatic war; UK’s
> report on Russia interference; US indicts Chinese hackers; EU Security
> Union Strategy; Egypt endorsed privacy law; Turkey’s bill on social
> medias; G20 on AI.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:14:56 +0200
> From: Johan Helsingius <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in ICANN’s DNS Work
>
> Full agreement with Sam, Milton and James.
>
> Julf
>
>> On 23-07-2020 17:39, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>> Full agreement with Milton here.
>>
>> *---*
>> *James Gannon*
>>>
>>>> On 7/23/2020 4:27:05 PM, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Jacky:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1) Current members low engagement in policy work
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This would not be helped by a merger, but it would not be harmed, either. It’s a different issue
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) Administrative overload for Maryam and the members of the various ECs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This most definitely WOULD be helped by a merger. One of the reasons there is too much administrative work is that we have duplicative, overlapping structures. And they confuse members or potential members constantly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3) Need to grow the membership base (new members)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you every tried explaining to new members the difference between NPOC and NCUC and why it matters? I have been doing that for 10 years, and I can tell you it doesn’t help recruit new members. It is serious friction.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4) To develop and maintain a strong voice in ICANN for our stakeholders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A more unified voice would be stronger.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's far too early to determine that a merger is the solution,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Disagree, it has been obvious that a merger is the solution for about 5 years. It’s way late to come to this recognition, though I am delighted that Sam and other NPOC members have.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 08:25:17 +0000
> From: Olivier Kouami <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in ICANN’s DNS Work
>
> +1 @Milton.
> Kind regards
> Olévié
>
>> Le ven. 24 juil. 2020 à 07:18, Johan Helsingius <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
>>
>> Full agreement with Sam, Milton and James.
>>
>> Julf
>>
>>> On 23-07-2020 17:39, [log in to unmask] wrote:
>>> Full agreement with Milton here.
>>>
>>> *---*
>>> *James Gannon*
>>>>
>>>> On 7/23/2020 4:27:05 PM, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Jacky:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1) Current members low engagement in policy work
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This would not be helped by a merger, but it would not be harmed,
>> either. It’s a different issue
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2) Administrative overload for Maryam and the members of the various
>> ECs
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This most definitely WOULD be helped by a merger. One of the reasons
>> there is too much administrative work is that we have duplicative,
>> overlapping structures. And they confuse members or potential members
>> constantly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 3) Need to grow the membership base (new members)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you every tried explaining to new members the difference between
>> NPOC and NCUC and why it matters? I have been doing that for 10 years, and
>> I can tell you it doesn’t help recruit new members. It is serious friction.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4) To develop and maintain a strong voice in ICANN for our stakeholders
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A more unified voice would be stronger.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's far too early to determine that a merger is the solution,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Disagree, it has been obvious that a merger is the solution for about 5
>> years. It’s way late to come to this recognition, though I am delighted
>> that Sam and other NPOC members have.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 13:23:24 +0300
> From: Raoul Plommer <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in ICANN’s DNS Work
>
>>
>> 1) Current members low engagement in policy work
>>
>>
>>
>> This would not be helped by a merger, but it would not be harmed, either.
>> It’s a different issue
>>
>
> Having three ECs and ICANN supporting most of those members to live
> meetings is a major difference in my view. Almost all EC members should be
> concerned with policy anyway, so eradicating 2/3 of our travel slots would
> likely result in even less policy activity.
>
>
>>
>>
>> 2) Administrative overload for Maryam and the members of the various
>> ECs
>>
>>
>>
>> This most definitely WOULD be helped by a merger. One of the reasons there
>> is too much administrative work is that we have duplicative, overlapping
>> structures. And they confuse members or potential members constantly.
>>
>
> Sure, the administrative work is probably doubled with the triumvirate as
> opposed to a singular structure. However, Maryam gets paid by ICANN to
> maintain most of the administrative work (just like is done with other SGs)
> so it's not really eating _that_ much into the efficiency of volunteers.
> What WOULD help with the confusion, is to embrace the logical division that
> is set in the names of our constituencies. Delegate NGO issues to NPOC and
> individual user issues to NCUC. Very easy to explain to all newcomers. I
> also prefer having two cooperative non-commercial echo chambers instead of
> one. I'm not sure if ALAC can even be counted in ICANN for defending
> non-commercial interests, so we're kind of alone with this mission here. I
> think our structure isn't really THAT heavy, considering it's really us
> that defend human rights of billions of people. And ICANN supports it more
> than we, the volunteers do. I think we need all the resources we can get to
> get this job (with gradually increasing difficulty) done, without actually
> paying someone to do it.
>
>
>>
>> 3) Need to grow the membership base (new members)
>>
>>
>>
>> Have you every tried explaining to new members the difference between NPOC
>> and NCUC and why it matters? I have been doing that for 10 years, and I can
>> tell you it doesn’t help recruit new members. It is serious friction.
>>
>
> Like I said above, let's finally agree to allocate NGOs to NPOC and
> individual user issues to NCUC. It's very easily explained and understood.
>
>
>>
>>
>> 4) To develop and maintain a strong voice in ICANN for our stakeholders
>>
>>
>>
>> A more unified voice would be stronger.
>>
>
> This would be correct, if there had been even mild disagreements about
> policy between the two constituencies in the last few years. I don't
> remember one.
>
> -Raoul
>
>
>
>> On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 at 18:26, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Jacky:
>>
>>
>>
>> 1) Current members low engagement in policy work
>>
>>
>>
>> This would not be helped by a merger, but it would not be harmed, either.
>> It’s a different issue
>>
>>
>>
>> 2) Administrative overload for Maryam and the members of the various
>> ECs
>>
>>
>>
>> This most definitely WOULD be helped by a merger. One of the reasons there
>> is too much administrative work is that we have duplicative, overlapping
>> structures. And they confuse members or potential members constantly.
>>
>>
>>
>> 3) Need to grow the membership base (new members)
>>
>>
>>
>> Have you every tried explaining to new members the difference between NPOC
>> and NCUC and why it matters? I have been doing that for 10 years, and I can
>> tell you it doesn’t help recruit new members. It is serious friction.
>>
>>
>>
>> 4) To develop and maintain a strong voice in ICANN for our stakeholders
>>
>>
>>
>> A more unified voice would be stronger.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's far too early to determine that a merger is the solution,
>>
>>
>>
>> Disagree, it has been obvious that a merger is the solution for about 5
>> years. It’s way late to come to this recognition, though I am delighted
>> that Sam and other NPOC members have.
>>
>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 10:38:51 +0000
> From: Olivier Kouami <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: A Proposal to Merge NCSG, NCUC and NPOC for More Efficiency in ICANN’s DNS Work
>
> Thanks Raoul.
>
>> Le ven. 24 juil. 2020 à 10:27, Raoul Plommer <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :
>>
>> 1) Current members low engagement in policy work
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This would not be helped by a merger, but it would not be harmed, either.
>>> It’s a different issue
>>>
>>
>> Having three ECs and ICANN supporting most of those members to live
>> meetings is a major difference in my view. Almost all EC members should be
>> concerned with policy anyway, so eradicating 2/3 of our travel slots would
>> likely result in even less policy activity.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) Administrative overload for Maryam and the members of the various
>>> ECs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This most definitely WOULD be helped by a merger. One of the reasons
>>> there is too much administrative work is that we have duplicative,
>>> overlapping structures. And they confuse members or potential members
>>> constantly.
>>>
>>
>> Sure, the administrative work is probably doubled with the triumvirate as
>> opposed to a singular structure. However, Maryam gets paid by ICANN to
>> maintain most of the administrative work (just like is done with other SGs)
>> so it's not really eating _that_ much into the efficiency of volunteers.
>> What WOULD help with the confusion, is to embrace the logical division that
>> is set in the names of our constituencies. Delegate NGO issues to NPOC and
>> individual user issues to NCUC. Very easy to explain to all newcomers. I
>> also prefer having two cooperative non-commercial echo chambers instead of
>> one. I'm not sure if ALAC can even be counted in ICANN for defending
>> non-commercial interests, so we're kind of alone with this mission here. I
>> think our structure isn't really THAT heavy, considering it's really us
>> that defend human rights of billions of people. And ICANN supports it more
>> than we, the volunteers do. I think we need all the resources we can get to
>> get this job (with gradually increasing difficulty) done, without actually
>> paying someone to do it.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> 3) Need to grow the membership base (new members)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you every tried explaining to new members the difference between
>>> NPOC and NCUC and why it matters? I have been doing that for 10 years, and
>>> I can tell you it doesn’t help recruit new members. It is serious friction.
>>>
>>
>> Like I said above, let's finally agree to allocate NGOs to NPOC and
>> individual user issues to NCUC. It's very easily explained and understood.
>>
> IMHO, this is another solution to address the issue. The difference between
> NCUC and NPOC.
>
> Warm regards
> Olévié
>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4) To develop and maintain a strong voice in ICANN for our stakeholders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A more unified voice would be stronger.
>>>
>>
>> This would be correct, if there had been even mild disagreements about
>> policy between the two constituencies in the last few years. I don't
>> remember one.
>>
>> -Raoul
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Jul 2020 at 18:26, Mueller, Milton L <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Jacky:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1) Current members low engagement in policy work
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This would not be helped by a merger, but it would not be harmed, either.
>>> It’s a different issue
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2) Administrative overload for Maryam and the members of the various
>>> ECs
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This most definitely WOULD be helped by a merger. One of the reasons
>>> there is too much administrative work is that we have duplicative,
>>> overlapping structures. And they confuse members or potential members
>>> constantly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 3) Need to grow the membership base (new members)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you every tried explaining to new members the difference between
>>> NPOC and NCUC and why it matters? I have been doing that for 10 years, and
>>> I can tell you it doesn’t help recruit new members. It is serious friction.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 4) To develop and maintain a strong voice in ICANN for our stakeholders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A more unified voice would be stronger.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It's far too early to determine that a merger is the solution,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Disagree, it has been obvious that a merger is the solution for about 5
>>> years. It’s way late to come to this recognition, though I am delighted
>>> that Sam and other NPOC members have.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 21:40:43 +0000
> From: Mamadou LO <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Internet Gov Weekly Brief (W30A20): US-China cyber-diplomatic war; UK’s report on Russia interference; US indicts Chinese hackers; EU Security Union Strategy; Egypt endorsed privacy law; Turkey’s bill on social medias; G20 on AI.
>
> Hi all!
> For your documentation, my pleasure to share our weekly review on Internet Governance<https://internetgov.news/internet-gov-weekly-brief-w30a20-us-china-cyber-diplomatic-war-uks-report-on-russia-interference-us-indicts-chinese-hackers-eu-security-union-strategy-egypt-endorsed-privacy-law-turke/>.
>
> Also, read our June 2020 monthly review in English<https://internetgov.news/internet-governance-monthly-brief-june-2020-roadmap-on-digital-cooperation-launched-more-cyberattacks-and-disinformation-amid-covid-19-cyber-geopolitics-over-5g-roll-out-more-digital-initiatives/>, French<https://internetgov.news/fr/revue-mensuelle-gouvernance-internet-juin-2020-lancement-feuille-de-route-sur-cooperation-numerique-plus-de-cyberattaques-et-de-desinformation-en-relation-avec-covid-19-cyber-geopolitique/>, Spanish<https://internetgov.news/es/resumen-mensual-de-gobernanza-de-internet-junio-2020-se-lanzo-la-hoja-de-ruta-para-la-cooperacion-digital-mas-ciberataques-y-desinformacion-en-medio-del-covid-19-cibergeopoliticas-sobre-el-5g-s/>, Portuguese<https://internetgov.news/pt/resumo-mensal-da-governanca-da-internet-junho-2020/> and Italian<https://internetgov.news/it/notiziario-mensile-internet-governance-giugno-2020-lancio-della-roadmap-on-digital-cooperation-piu-attacchi-informatici-e-disinformazione-tra-covid-19-cyber-geopolitica-sull/>
>
> Cordially!
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> End of NCSG-DISCUSS Digest - 23 Jul 2020 to 24 Jul 2020 (#2020-188)
> *******************************************************************
|
