[UA-discuss] [UA-EAI] [Ext] Re: UA-EAI WG charter
Mark Svancarek (CELA)
marksv at microsoft.com
Fri Aug 9 21:34:13 UTC 2019
Although I disagreed with Jay on the topics of outreach, ambassadors, promotion, etc., I want to say that I do agree that providing travel support more broadly than we do now is not a good idea.
As the charter says, "...The UASG is envisioned to be an activity-oriented advocacy group, not a policy-oriented group. As a result, weighted representation is not expected, and participation from various stakeholders is expected to change over time and depending on the activities and priorities appropriate at various stages of the project."
UASG membership is wide open, but travel assistance is approved on a case-by-case basis related to specific tasks, not related to affiliation.
From: UA-discuss <ua-discuss-bounces at icann.org> On Behalf Of Jay Daley
Sent: Friday, August 9, 2019 2:09 PM
To: ua-discuss at icann.org; ua-eai at icann.org
Subject: Re: [UA-discuss] [UA-EAI] [Ext] Re: UA-EAI WG charter
I would like to note that I disagree with the recommendations about travel for multiple community members.
The purpose of UASG should be to get non-compliant code changed and we should be using 95% of our resources to that goal. In the last couple of years we have become focused on promotion, branding, outreach, ambassadors, measurement, etc, which are all useful but have only an indirect impact on our goal. We are in danger of 95% of our resources going on these activities and our goal being achieved very, very slowly as a result.
I would like to see travel limited to the chair and vice-chair attending only two icann meetings a year and the rest of our resources directly targeted at getting the code changed.
(sent from my phone)
+64 21 678840
More information about the UA-discuss