@Nuno, I apologize if I gave the impression to trash other people's opinions, as this was certainly not my intention. I do not want to contribute to these dynamics, which do harm our community. 

I would like to remind the people in this list that there are already manifold opportunties for mentoring and supporting inclusion of newcomers. by way of example, people like Avri, Kathy, Robin, Stephanie, Rafik (just to mention some of the many more that helped me) are kind and eager to share their expertise (sorry to volunteer you ;); programs like the NCUC travel grants, and the occasions ICANN itself provides are up and running. We can do more and do it better... We can multiply platforms and tools, we can make info more accessible ect... but it is ultimately everyone's responsibility to move beyond the +1.  



Inviato da iPhone

Il giorno 03 set 2016, alle ore 10:28, Nuno M. Garcia <[log in to unmask]> ha scritto:

I'm all for transparency and accountability all the way, on every step of the process.

But I don't think my question is pointless by any means.

I think the reason why we have few candidates is also because this community is all about the same persons over and over again. Little effort is done to inclusiveness and to bring to the discussion the newcomers.

We need a process that mentors newcomers and stimulates them, maybe in private messages so that all can understand that this is not rocket science and the few ones that speak their mind off this list are not "God chosen" but merely people with tons of experience and a lot of time and appetite for these types of subjects.

Also, trashing other colleagues opinions usually doesn't help neither transparency nor accountability nor inclusiveness.

Keep this mind if you will.

Warm regards

Nuno


On Sep 3, 2016 00:49, "Milan, Stefania" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> everyone had a chance to run as candidate. Why no more candidates were
> (self)nominated?

This is a good question, but not the only question.
Tentative answers could include some of the following: because it is a lot of hard work. Because sometimes the tension in this community is intimidating. Because sometimes this community is intimidating. Because we are all volunteers and time is limited (and ICANN not the only organizing in the world worth volunteering for)...?

But at the stage we are in, this question, and these tentative answers, are pointless. While accountability remains an open, and very key, concern. Thanks Stephanie for this reminder, which (I am sure) interprets the thoughts of many others in this community.

Reporting by us councillors, as discussed recently, might increase transparency, but is not as such a mechanism of accountability. It is only the first step towards accountability, while to date we have no clue as to how to enhance and enforce accountability of the NCSG. I am sure each of us do their very best, but this is not a sufficient condition. And we can certainly not expect ICANN to be accountable, if we are not the first ones to embrace accountability in our daily work within ICANN.

 Stefi


________________________________________
Da: NCSG-Discuss <[log in to unmask]> per conto di avri doria <[log in to unmask]>
Inviato: sabato 3 settembre 2016 01.12.16
A: [log in to unmask]
Oggetto: Re: Election propaganda

On 02-Sep-16 17:46, Nuno M. Garcia wrote:
>
> everyone had a chance to run as candidate. Why no more candidates were
> (self)nominated?
>

several were nominated.
some even accepted but then changed their minds.
do not quite understand that mechanism but it happens a lot.

avri

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

 

The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, forwarding, or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited without the express permission of the sender. If you received this communication in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.