[council] Fwd: Assignment of NCAs
avri at acm.org
Sat Sep 5 23:33:54 UTC 2009
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
> 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.
> 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
> 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
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.
More information about the council