Avri is correct,

There is cross channel static at several levels here. Since the core issue here (stakeholder voice and stakeholder interests in the Internet ecosystem (not just ICANN's remit) ) I will write more later.
Tied up in other business at the moment.

To paraphrase the American humorist Mark Twain: "Misunderstood information can be around the world before accurate information has time to put its shoes on."

Let's want for a bit,and clear the air. There is more than enough to do at all levels and more than one "deck where there is a call to deck hands". Let's get the shoes on first.

Sam L.

On 18/07/2014 10:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote:

Hi, It is possible i am misunderstanding, but i think the conversation is cross channeled. In one case the argument seems to be about how hard it is to get the NGOs who are all out consumed with their mission on a bare bones (time, money) budget to do this too. In one case the argument seems to that we MUST get them involved because it is instrumental for them to be involved. From my vantage point, I think both are true. Accommodating both realities is tough work. avri BTW, my working definition of multistakeholderism (m17m) as a reference to where i come from in these discussions: Multistakeholderism (m17m) The study and practice of forms of participatory democracy that allow for all those who have a stake and who have the inclination, to participate on equal footing in the deliberation of issues and the recommendation of solutions. While final decisions and implementation may be assigned to a single stakeholder group, these decision makers are always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and the implementations. Of course the devil is in the details and implementation is really hard.