<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>The issue is not “participation” but “accountability”. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>To whom are these “stakeholders” accountable apart from to themselves or to whomever has paid for their participation? Are their formal procedures for accountability, are their relationship to their funders transparent, if one group of stakeholders or simply one group of participant concerned about the nature of the participation/representation of another group what measures are available to challenge that participation and under what terms? <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Who is accountable to ensure “the public interest”?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>How is one able to ensure the “accountability” of the entire process and to would the entire process be accountable?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Of course, there are flaws and failures but it is quite simple to answer each of the above for “democratic” decision making processes… but I’m still waiting for someone to enlighten me as to how MS process can be held accountable.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>M<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Sivasubramanian M [mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Friday, October 24, 2014 12:36 PM<br><b>To:</b> michael gurstein<br><b>Cc:</b> Jeremy Malcolm; governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Bits bestbits@lists.bestbits.net; forum@justnetcoalition.org<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [bestbits] [governance] Re: [IRPCoalition] Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU Plenipot joint recommendations<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'>It is not fair to say that the Multistakeholder model restricts participation. In fact the opposite is true because this new model has a working framework in place for bringing in participants other than elected representatives and appointed functionaries ( would not be very wrong to class these them both under "Government") to the table. And it is too early in the evolutionary phase of multistakeholder model to draw a conclusion that the participating stakeholders </span><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#333333'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'>are not representative enough.</span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'> </span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'>The contrary of what you said is true. By its definition, by its intentions, and by the framework already in place, Multistakeholderism DOES extend AND broaden the opportunity for EFFECTIVE participation. <o:p></o:p></span></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><br clear=all><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><a href="https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy" target="_blank">Sivasubramanian M</a><o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 11:49 PM, michael gurstein <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>MSism as presented bears absolutely no relationship to Participatory Democracy, in fact it is exactly the opposite—rather than extending or broadening the opportunity for effective participation MSism restricts this by putting the condition of “stakeholdership”<o:p></o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#333333'></span><span style='font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#333333'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></body></html>