Hello to Each and All,
As a neophyte to all ICANN/NCSG/NCUC matters, I must admit that I know what I don't know....
That said, if I wanted to run for an elected office, I would not be intimidated by the "acclamation"
of another candidate. In my opinion, anyone who is intimidated by that is probably not a strong
candidate.
My question is this: Who RUNS the internet? I would Love to attend ICANN 57 in Hyderabad, India.
But guess what, no one is going to PAY me to go there.
I ask YOU - who is paying for YOUR airfare and hotel, and meals, and extras....?
I truly believe that all of those Fortune 1000 companies who think that they own the internet should pay
for anyone like me who has the time and the interest to go to Hyderabad....
ICANN won't get "New Blood" into this process until it starts funding New Blood. With all all of the
Billions of Dollar$ that are being earned via the internet, how come a concerned voice such as mine
cannot go to Hyderabad?
Many thanks for listening....
Cheers,
Patrick Lenihan
---- Original Message ----
From: Stephanie Perrin <[log in to unmask]>
To: NCSG-DISCUSS <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wed, Aug 3, 2016 10:27 pm
Subject: Re: +1's and support
+1 Well said. We all would welcome any questions. Cannot say it often enough.
Stephanie Perrin
On 2016-08-03 19:04, Dan Krimm 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