[rssac-caucus] Service Coverage WP: last attempt: call for WP leader.

[Alejandro Acosta]

Hello Fred,

  First, thanks for your answer.

  Second, I fully understand your comments and I feel some concern
between the lines. I could not agree more.

  I will be brave and say something as a member of the RSSAC Caucus
Membership committee. As you know every candidate to the Caucus has to
make/send a SOI. If we check those SOIs all of them contain at least one
of the following words (not poiting anybody):

- Collaboratively

- Willing to spend time/hours on RSSAC tasks

- Collaborate in person or email

- Attend calls

- Help RSSAC *

- Etc, etc, many similar adjetives to the above


 The previous words were taken from the following section that are in
every SOI  [1]:

• Motivation for membership in the Caucus

• Indication of availability


  One more time, if you (all of us) check the SOIs probably every person
has the time and the willingness of helping.

  I really don't understand why some people do not step in when
something like this is needed. Should we (Caucus/Staff/Chairs) check
some member's SOIs and contact that person directly?


Thanks,


Alejandro,


[1] 
https://community.icann.org/display/RSI/RSSAC+Caucus+Statements+of+Interest

PS.  As a final comment, sorry to talk in first person, I'm not stepping
in because so far I'm in another WP, Nomcom liason and as I said RSSAC
Caucus Membership committe.


El 19/3/19 a las 11:58, Fred Baker escribió:
> I think the point of Lars' email is that since the work party hasn't managed to find a leader, the work hasn't started. Given a leader, the statement of work can be changed accordingly. The RSSAC would indeed like the work done, but Lars is still looking for a leader.
>
> One of the issues that RSSAC has had with caucus involvement is the lack of a response or involvement in projects, which often means that the work is only done by one or two - or none.
>
> On Mar 19, 2019, at 1:19 AM, Alejandro Acosta <alejandro at lacnic.net> wrote:
>> Hello Lars, nice to tell you hello,
>>
>> I was going to ask about some timeline of the project, I mean, starting date, due dates, final, etc when I noticed in your attached document it says:
>>
>> "Final draft submitted to the RSSAC no later than 2019-03-31. Submission prior to the
>> deadline is welcome"
>>
>> Also the document is dated: 07 August, 2018
>>
>> Is all the above right?, have you restarted the dates?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Alejandro,
>>
>> El 18/3/19 a las 10:50, Lars-Johan Liman escribió:
>>> Dear Caucus members,
>>>
>>> Last year, ICANN staff helped conducting a survey in the caucus, which
>>> among other things asked for suggested work items that the caucus saw as
>>> prioritised. One item high on the list was service coverage for the root
>>> service. In response to that we've tried to spin up a work party to work
>>> with the issue. A (low) number of caucus members have signed up for it,
>>> but my call for a volunteer work party leader among the volunteers has
>>> gone unanswered.
>>>
>>> I hereby make one last attempt in the wider caucus community for someone
>>> to step forward to lead the work on service coverage.
>>>
>>> I intend to bring up this WP at the caucus meeting in Prague coming
>>> Sunday. With some luck we have a WP leader by then. If not, we'll
>>> discuss how to proceed ... or not?
>>>
>>> To refresh your memories, I append the statement of work and scope for
>>> the WP.
>>>
>>> 				Best regards,
>>> 				  /Lars-Johan Liman
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rssac-caucus mailing list
>>>
>>> rssac-caucus at icann.org
>>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus
>> _______________________________________________
>> rssac-caucus mailing list
>> rssac-caucus at icann.org
>> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus