NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Amr Elsadr <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Amr Elsadr <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 4 Aug 2016 16:03:53 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (118 lines)
Hi,

Thanks for this, Dan.

Amr

> On Aug 4, 2016, at 1:04 AM, Dan Krimm <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> I think it's worth pointing out that my sense of the veterans here is that
> they are generally welcoming to energetic newcomers, the more the merrier
> as long as you are prepared to dig in and share some heavy lifting.
> 
> The veterans often will feel burdened -- there is much to be done, and the
> relative few with long-standing experience in the labyrinth of ICANN often
> feel like there are few alternatives to pick up the ball.  Then there is a
> tension between allocating resources to getting new folks up to speed
> versus just getting things done.  It's that joke about being up to your
> butt in alligators while trying to drain the swamp.
> 
> In many positions here, experience is not as crucial as it may be to NomCom
> in particular -- new folks can get up to speed as long as they can allocate
> the effort for the learning curve, and if they bring related technical and
> policy experience from outside ICANN per se they can very quickly become
> very valuable to the process.
> 
> I think newcomers who come to us with energy and sufficient time to be
> available for some hard work should not feel intimidated at all.  The more
> we can spread the work around, the more effective we will be collectively.
> (Spoken as someone who regretfully has little time currently for the heavy
> substantive work...)
> 
> While it would be great to have more of a mentoring dynamic here (as you
> put it, a leadership program), there is at least a decent collection of
> self-learning resources that are available to new members.  Here's a
> selection from what Tapani included in his most recent welcome message:
> 
> General tips:
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/How+To+Get+Involved
> 
> List of working groups and their members:
> https://community.icann.org/display/gnsononcomstake/Getting+Involved+in+Working+Groups
> 
> A one-stop page about ICANN's policy efforts:
> http://gnso.icann.org/sites/gnso.icann.org/files/gnso/presentations/policy-efforts.htm
> 
> Information about GNSO and about GNSO activities during ICANN meetings:
> http://gnso.icann.org/en/icannmeeting
> 
> Finally, if you begin to feel overwhelmed by ICANN acronyms, you will
> find most of them in this glossary:
> https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/glossary-2014-02-03-en
> 
> 
> We've discussed more active mentoring options in the past, but I'm not
> aware of anything that really put down roots and established a durable
> process -- this is a long-standing issue that has simply not been resolved.
> Short of that we fall back on individual bootstrapping to get going.  I
> would encourage newcomers to try to identify the people involved in various
> areas of interest and to not be shy about asking them pointed questions in
> order to accelerate the process of self-education.
> 
> It's less like a cable car and more like rock-climbing.
> 
> If we were to formalize this, I might imagine creating formal roles in
> NCSG/NCUC/NPOC where the sole responsibility is to actively help newcomers
> get oriented and engaged.  In a typical NPO with lots of volunteers, this
> might be a Volunteer Supervisor/Coordinator, and it would be a paid
> position.  We have no paid positions, but we might nevertheless find it
> valuable to have someone formally in such a role (an elected position?
> appointed by EC?), as opposed to only having policy-substantive roles.
> Depending on how it is defined, it may or may not require a charter update.
> 
> Bottom line:
> 
> Don't be intimidated, for any reason.  If you want to get involved, there
> will always be a way to get you going in some capacity.  You don't have to
> be elected to a representative position in order to contribute something of
> unique value to the group.  Start out by getting onto a WG or two, and when
> you find your footing you'll be ready to run for an elected position.
> 
> Find an entry point to focus your efforts, and don't worry about being
> expert in the entire range of NCSG activities.  Pick something where you
> have an existing interest and perhaps some useful expertise outside ICANN,
> and jump right in.  If you can actually commit to a serious work schedule,
> you will quickly be seen as an expert and will rise according to that merit.
> 
> It's not about joining up and immediately getting elected to something.
> Get involved by participating in specific working processes, demonstrate
> what you can do, and then you will naturally be asked to do more (be
> careful what you ask for, you might get it!).
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
> At 7:10 PM -0300 8/3/16, Renata Aquino Ribeiro wrote:
>> Hi
>> 
>> I don't agree with discouraging people from expressing +1s to
>> nominations. It doesn't even seem feasible, really.
>> 
>> However, as someone who decided not to run, it is very intimidating
>> the immense outpur of support for continuity, in opposition to the
>> timid and localized expressions around new names. It wasn't my
>> decisive factor but it is a factor now and I can't seem to think of it
>> not being so in a foreseeable future.
>> 
>> But, this intimidation to me has more to do with the roster of "usual
>> suspects" always climbing up the ladders of ICANN leadership than an
>> actual aversion to newcomers. Being new, not from an english speaking
>> country, will always be harder. That is why diversity criteria
>> addresses this and perhaps thinking about a leadership programme to
>> NCs could make things better.
>> 
>> Best,
>> 
>> Renata

ATOM RSS1 RSS2