+1 @Rafik. Agree with using adhocracy.de as a tool to improve pour participation in this juge process. Thank Renata for raising up real concern. Let's move forward. Olévié Le 18 août 2016 21:06, "Rafik Dammak" <[log in to unmask]> a écrit : > Hi Renata, > > Thanks for the question. as someone from developing countries I understand > the concerns and that was an area of focus for years. > > I would like to clarify some things first. For the case of NCUC, we have > regional representatives in Executive committee and they are expected to > liaise with the members of their region and also doing outreach. While the > GNSO councillors are more focused on policy work and there is the > geographical diversity in NCSG charter.it is probably not enough nor > fully working, and so things need to be improved to encompass the diversity > of needs. > > I don't think the solution would be to focus on specific regions per se > but on working on better wider membership engagement to benefit all. There > may be some differences and specific for each region and we have to find > out how identify them efficiently. > I am not aware about specific regional effort from other groups within > GNSO, I do think that is mostly about outreach and we do that as you know. > there are what is called the regional strategy working group for most of > the region. They are kind of cross-community groups, for example several > NCUC members and myself are members of the on for MENA region and > adjourning countries. > > The idea is to make the the policy discussion more accessible and easy to > digest, sometimes we have either too much information ( long reports during > public comment) or not enough , or with a lot of jargon or details that > make it hard to grasp if you didn't follow the process etc. We got to find > the right balance, format and the yesterday call, there was some agreement > about having the regular briefing and improving the discussion in NCSG > policy call. we can experiment those changes in coming days and say how it > works. by iterations, we would reach the right solution(s) that may satisfy > most the of people. that may help to build the foundations for better > engagement. > > by informing better the members, I do think they can identify what are the > topics that interest them and have impact on their region and specific > needs. it would be hard for individual councillors to identify the needs > of a region by him/herself and s/he needs members support on that matter. > At NCSG, we advocated for the applicant support for new gTLD some years > ago and the topic is gonna be in table soon with the new working group. > This is an example where if we can give better explanation about the > context, background the members from developing regions can provide their > input and their insight and feeling more involved. > > We will do more information sharing in appropriate format and manner, do > poll/consultation either formal or informal manner. On another thread I > proposed that we experiment the https://adhocracy.de/ tool again which > give the possibility to poll, track comments etc. Additional way would be > to have some communication channel (mailing list, skype channel, slack > channel etc depending on the widely used tool in that region) to ask > members from one region about their thought for specific topic. but we also > need to avoid creating silos. I would also encourage more bottom-up, > self-organizing efforts from members and councillors would be happy to help > for sure (I am volunteering to help of course :-) ). we all are volunteers > here and any help is welcome to share the workload. > > Best, > > Rafik > > 2016-08-19 0:37 GMT+09:00 Renata Aquino Ribeiro <[log in to unmask]>: > >> Hi all >> >> Just wanted to clarify a point of a question I made during the candidates >> call >> >> It is great that both NCSG and NCUC have amazing LAC representatives. >> They not only represent the region but maintain online actions >> engaging civil society in IG which are key to participating in LAC. >> A while ago there was a comment about one of the reps current address >> being in EU. I do not mind and have not heard about any LAC colleague >> that worries about this. It is more important what someone lives as >> coming from the region and doing work for it than actually living >> there. Speaking as a researcher, the few opportunities I had of doing >> work abroad were very impactful for the group and region I come from. >> >> So the point was >> >> Given the low level of participation of LAC and other developing >> regions in policymaking process at GNSO, it is important that the >> candidates keep thinking about strategies to listen to these voices. >> Specifically in LAC's case, the disengagment due to the ICANN's 2 year >> distance from the region will only worsen. Other sectors in ICANN have >> been working on ways to react to this. I have seen no reaction from >> GNSO or NCUC/NCSG. >> >> So without addressing this problem, it does not seem possible that >> there will be new engagement of volunteers in GNSO. >> >> That was just an observation. >> >> Best >> >> Renata >> _______________________________________________ >> Ncuc-discuss mailing list >> [log in to unmask] >> http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ncuc-discuss mailing list > [log in to unmask] > http://lists.ncuc.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ncuc-discuss > >