[council] Fwd: Assignment of NCAs

[Avri Doria]

I was encouraged to forward this on from a semi private conversation.

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Avri Doria <avri at acm.org>
> Date: 4 September 2009 15:26:38 EDT
> Subject: Re: Assignment of NCAs
>
> Hi,
>
> I have a few views.
>
> 1. the best of all possible worlds is that the NCAs pick.  I do not  
> think it really mater that one is new.  I think that the 2 current  
> ones can have a conversation explain the lay of the land and then  
> between them figure it out. One of the things we have figured out is  
> that the NCAs need to work together in order to cover everything.   
> i.e while they do not have the same viewpoints or the same  
> affinities as those in the constituencies/SG, the amount of work is  
> the same.  The only way they can survive is to share.  So day 1 is a  
> good time to start - this should happen anyway. Also we can not  
> assume that everyone enters as a tabla rasa.
>
> 2. I still like the idea of having NCAs serve in all houses with  
> them rotating through the houses annually or semi annually, bringing  
> the understanding that is lacking of the other houses with them.  As  
> was spoken of and seen in the last meeting, there are many fierce  
> animosities in the GNSO that are barely kept in check. It has always  
> been thus.  The NCAs can help to bridge these somewhat merely by  
> moving from house to house to houseless.
>
> 3. The reason someone is appointed is to contribute.  As much as  
> possible that should be from day one.  Yeah it is hard, but i guess  
> people should know that coming in.  Why volunteer otherwise.  It is  
> not glamorous, is often painful, and there are very few rewards for  
> anyone who does not find their reward in doing a job they think  
> worth the time as well as they can.  It is easier to contribute as  
> part of a group whether it is constituency, sg or house as there  
> are  group dynamics that carry one alone.  As a lone NCA without a  
> vote and nothing but ones understanding and ability to speak to the  
> issues to aid them in contribution will require experience.  That is  
> why I suggest that the longest in the council should be the loner.   
> To be so isolated with no vote and nothing to do but watch for a  
> year trying to get a word in edgewise would seem to be to be rather  
> debilitating.  Just think of what is like to move to new place and  
> be all alone and relatively irrelevant for a year.  That is what it  
> would be like.
>

One question came in on this was whether I considered Alan irrelevant  
because he had no vote.

I responded:

> Alan is a case  for my argument.  He is experienced and knows what  
> to do.
> He doesn't need a vote.  Besides he has ALAC behind him.
> My point is, a newbie who knew nothing about the GNSO and council  
> working
> would be at a loss and since they did not even have the obligation  
> of voting to force
> them to get up to speed, I expect that most would just sit quietly  
> in the corner and feel
> lost.

In truth and in reconsidering what I wrote, I must admit, that even as  
a homeless newbie, I would have probably done everything possible to  
get  up to speed and then gotten vocal vote or no vote.  But not  
everyone is as shy and retiring as I am.  Most people need some group  
environment to feel able to contribute.  Then again, the council could  
put in its requirements - brash and outspoken people are desired.

Just my 2 euro.

a.