[NA-Discuss] Voting None of the Above Re: …

Kieren McCarthy kierenmccarthy at gmail.com
Fri Jul 20 13:40:13 UTC 2012

Well I think you've both just answered the question as to why there are so few people engaged in NARALO.


[from mobile device]

On Jul 20, 2012, at 3:50 AM, "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson1 at GOV.NU.CA> wrote:

> +1
> Very well said.
> D
> Darlene A. Thompson
> CAP Administrator
> N-CAP/Department of Education
> P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
> Phone:  (867) 975-5631
> Fax:  (867) 975-5610
> dthompson at gov.nu.ca
> ________________________________________
> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Evan Leibovitch [evan at telly.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 2:20 AM
> To: Kieren McCarthy
> Cc: NA-Discuss Discuss
> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss]       Voting None of the Above Re: …
> On 19 July 2012 12:39, Kieren McCarthy <kierenmccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:
> *At the risk at getting embroiled in pointless name-calling, John I think
>> you are demonstrating precisely the mindset that is behind the reason that
>> only one person is standing for each of the four positions.*
> Kieren, you *are* getting embrolied in pointless name calling.
> Funny that you suddenly seem so interested in At-Large issues when it comes
> to our internals.  We've been active in promoting end-user sensibilities in
> WHOIS, gTLD, trademark, internationalization and other issues. I've
> personally been trying -- practically begging, since before Prague -- to
> get you to even LOOK at the R3 white paper At-Large has produced, an
> broadly-crafted attempt to make ICANN more representative of (and
> accountable to) the world at large. You've been WAY too busy for that. But
> not too busy to gawk at an unfortunate personal issue, and pass judgement
> on a consensus process that seems to work for most. Like most
> decision-making systems, it's imperfect. But it does result in NARALO
> members' initiating more than its share of ALAC policy initiatives, and
> still being the one of the only regions with a formal acceptance of
> participants who aren't part of an ALS.
> And yet... Rather than focus on the substance of what we're actually trying
> to say -- which you have completely ignored to date -- you seek to dwell on
> the "what gives you the right to say it?" approach.
> Sorry there wasn't any tabloid fodder for you on Monday (the first NARALO
> call you've attended ... ever?). No meltdown. Not even raised voices. Just
> talk about policy, planning for the Toronto meeting, and ensuring the
> everyone who had something to say on our internal issues was heard,
> Smoothly run and ended on time. But judging from your takeaway comments,
> Plan B appears to be focusing on why At-Large doesn't function more like
> Amway.
> *So here are some questions:*
> Really? REALLY?
> Are you really asking volunteers to provide the research that you will then
> turn around and sell to others?
> And then complain that we don't have enough time for <insert your pet issue
> here>?
> If your questions are intended to discover holes in ICANN's At-Large
> outreach strategies, you'll have an easy time of it once you do the
> research. If your intentions are indeed constructive, you're welcome to
> join us in advocating At-Large growth through anywhere near the kind of
> resources that ICANN expends to grow its pool of registrars and TLDs. But
> the tone just appears as building a case for diverting our limited
> volunteer resources away from understanding and shaping the ICANN
> labyrinth, and towards recruitment. No thanks.
> My ALS (and a number of others) was discovered and brought in by Jacob
> Malthouse, an ICANN staffer whose job it was to go out and engage members
> of the public who'd never heard of ICANN -- let alone cared about it -- and
> convince them to get them involved. Jacob's job was difficult; too bad you
> can't ask him about it because his position no longer exists, so it's no
> surprise the job isn't being done anymore. NARALO has made proposals to
> duplicate this task using volunteers instead of staff, but our request to
> get even basic expenses covered for this project has been turned down for
> two (or it it three?) years in a row.
> *These are basic questions, basic steps for a grassroots organization.
>> And they all cost $0.*
> How sad that you consider volunteer time to be worthless. Mine isn't.
> - Evan
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list