I'd like to just agree with Harold and Rick.  This is generally a quiet group for many of the reasons that they've expressed.  I think Harold's right that any constituency statement should be recognized as the position of the entire constituency.  If any of us specifically oppose something moving forward then we should speak up, otherwise those who are doing the hard work and making an attempt to include us all (by posting drafts along the way and asking for comments) should conclude that they have our support if we don't respond.  It's not ideal, but it does seem necessary.

Mawaki, your hard work is very much appreciated.  Thank you!

And Carlos, yours is as well. I think we all understand the frustration with a quiet NCUC list.  Milton certainly dealt with it as well.  I'll try to pipe up a bit more and maybe others will as well. 

I wonder if we might need a bit more background now and then about what's happening in the GNSO... I'm sorry to add a task for members who are already volunteering time, but if there could be regular updates on council or task force activity then it might be easier to stay up-to-date and get involved, give input, etc.

Best,

Frannie


*  *  *  *
Frannie Wellings
Program Manager
Free Press
(202) 265-1490 x 21
http://www.freepress.net

Media is the issue.

Mawaki Chango wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite"> 
Dear Carlos,

I regret this debate (including your previous posting), and I suspect
things would have been better if the reactions to this call came
earlier enough to leave room for fine tuning last minute negotiations
and for a more consensual conclusion. Our responsibility to all of us
is involved here one way or the other, but while I'll still carry out
mine as GNSO Councillor, I feel I'd better not volunteer the next
time for this type of situation within NCUC and leave the
responsibility to mobilize the constituency where it belongs. 

I am aware that people don't necessarily agree when they don't
express themeselves while they are invited to, but I tend to think
that they take the responsibility to be counted as endorsing what is
being said or done on their behalf - and they accept such
responsibility.

I just went through the GNSO constituency questionaire, and realized
that this is not the first time I'm looking at them; my silence so
far means: I can't think of anything else to add to it. If someone
does, that's great; let us see the final/latest result. Otherwise, I
accept the responsibility to be associated to the questionnaire as it
is.

Best regards,

Mawaki

--- Carlos Afonso <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

  
Near consensus? Several members did not express their positions in
this 
list. In any case, you can say it represents the position of a
majority 
of the ones who did participate.

NCUC is not very participative these days -- I still need help on
the 
GNSO constituency questionnaire, and no one replied so far (since 
Dec.19, 2005).

--c.a.

Mawaki Chango wrote:

    
Dear Olof,

Kindly find attached the above metioned statement that I wish to
submit to the GNSO on behalf of the NCUC.

Please note that it is _nearly_ a consensus position, failing one
voice. In any case, this is the aproved result by an overwhelming
majority from our discussions on the topic.

Best regards,

Mawaki