[NA-Discuss] Summary Minutes NARALO Teleconference 09 June

[Jacqueline A. Morris]

Ditto.
Jacqueline
Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> Danny Younger wrote:
>   
>> You are at liberty to make the case that the at-large deserves more dollars than other constituent bodies.  I would argue that those who do the work are to be rewarded, while those that accomplish almost nothing should receive almost nothing.
>>   
>>     
> Danny, you can't suck and blow at the same time. In your
> counter-proposal to Summit funding you advocated a formula that refused
> to fund anyone that had so much as participated in an email discussion,
> subsidizing only the silent ones. Now you magically argue for just the
> opposite. Both arguments, seemingly changing in tune with the tides, are
> critically flawed. They're not only mind-boggingly inconsistent, they're
> simply wrong.
>
> At-Large is a body explicitly designed to find people and organizations
> who are not already deeply versed in policy, to bring them to a
> sufficient level of awareness and then to extract opinion. During the
> last NARALO conference call -- that Danny supposedly attended -- a
> number of people clearly indicated that they are intimidated by the
> lingo and the elitism that serves as a barrier to effective
> participation by newcomers. Some by nature are hesitant to participate
> in discussions dominated by those who are more .... assertive. Others
> who are unsure of their positions simply choose not to participate for
> fear of embarrassing themselves. That does not mean they cannot
> contribute or that their views are not worth hearing. It means that this
> particular form of communications does not work for all.
>
> The face to face meetings afforded by travel subsidy is another form of
> communications, less frequent but extremely effective. It's been my
> experience that some people simply work better when they can put faces
> to email addresses and look people in the eye as they're talking. The
> occasional smile helps too.
>
> As for other constituent bodies, they have vested interests to protect,
> interests that are generally well-financed. Lacking such vested
> interests, At-Large will almost by definition not match the resources of
> the other constituencies. So the choice is either providing resources,
> or silencing At-Large (with the exception of squeaky wheels such as
> Danny; this explains why he wants to cut funding to us no matter which
> rationale-of-the-day he uses, -- silencing all these poor, uninformed
> policy pretenders leaves more of the stage to him).
>
> One size does not fit all. I prefer not to shut out people whose views
> have been under-represented simply because the current forms of ICANN
> communications are badly suited to them. So I will continue to advocate
> for support for a process that is an inclusive and diverse as possible.
>
> - Evan
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
>