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 > >