RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q5 diversity by-law

[Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>]

I agree with the policy but don't like the last sentence. The "must put into 
place outreach programs" language is what bothers me. To whom is this 
obligation directed? As a noncommercial stakeholder who has to struggle to 
support my own participation, I always bristle at these "unfunded mandates" 
that tell me to spend even more of my time and money to do "outreach" to 
unnamed others. It is a somewhat emotional response, rooted in ICANN-fatigue. 
But politically speaking I also resent the implication that the legitimacy of 
my own participation - which I perceive as both a right and a necessity to 
protect my own personal and organizational interests - is conditional upon my 
investing resources in getting other participants to show up. People are 
responsible for their own interests. If these rules and outreach programs apply 
to ICANN and its budget, fine. If you're throwing another burden on volunteer 
stakeholders who already devote time, money and effort to ICANN, no way. 
Clarify that and its ok with me. 

Milton Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
------------------------------
Internet Governance Project:
http://internetgovernance.org
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 11:04 AM
> To: gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [gnso-restruc-dt] Q5 diversity by-law
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> As the conversation on this has come to a lull and somewhat of an  
> impasse, I would like to suggest some phrasing that I hope helps in  
> reaching consensus on this important point.  In reading the 
> messages,  
> some of the important themes I picked up were:
> 
> - there should be parity between the requirements on the SGs
> - geographical diversity is necessary but difficult and may sometime  
> require exceptions
> - other forms of diversity including but not limited to sector and  
> skill set are also important, but harder to define in a 
> manner that is  
> appropriate for by-laws.
> 
> Building on a suggestion made by Jon, I suggest the following for  
> discussion:
> 
> Stakeholder Groups should ensure their representation on the GNSO  
> Council is as diverse as possible, including but not limited to  
> geographical region, sector and in terms of skill set.  In order to  
> insure geographical diversity, no more then 1/3 of a single  
> Stakeholder groups representatives to the Council can come from any  
> single ICANN defined geographic region;  any exception to this  
> requirement must be approved by a 2/3 vote of both houses.  In terms  
> of other forms of diversity, SG rules and procedures as well as  
> outreach programs must be put into place to insure maximum possible  
> diversity in all areas.
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> 
>