<HEAD>
<STYLE>body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}p{margin:0px}</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=compText>
<P>Milton and all,</P>
<P> </P>
<P> If so, than I should be soon receiving a notice of biatrization from the holly see</P>
<P>very soon! >;) But I believe such is highly improbable. <BR><BR><BR></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Milton L Mueller <MUELLER@SYR.EDU><BR>Sent: Sep 29, 2009 4:31 PM <BR>To: "'governance@lists.cpsr.org'" <GOVERNANCE@LISTS.CPSR.ORG>, 'Parminder' <PARMINDER@ITFORCHANGE.NET><BR>Subject: RE: [governance] IGC membership <BR><BR><ZZZHTML><ZZZHEAD><ZZZMETA content="text/html; charset=us-ascii" http-equiv="Content-Type"><ZZZMETA content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3603" name="GENERATOR"></ZZZHEAD><ZZZBODY bgColor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=634333121-29092009><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I'm feelin' that collective responsibility right now. I AM the IGC....</FONT></SPAN></DIV><ZZZ!-- text -- format plain from Converted>
<P><FONT size=2>Milton Mueller<BR>Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies<BR>XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology<BR>------------------------------<BR>Internet Governance Project:<BR><A href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org</A><BR></FONT></P>
<DIV> </DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Parminder [mailto:parminder@itforchange.net] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, September 29, 2009 4:13 AM<BR><B>To:</B> governance@lists.cpsr.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> [governance] IGC membership<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">The membership issue of this group certainly needs to be sorted out.<BR><BR>I have said this before, but I can see only one real way out. To have a clear membership which is renewed bi-yearly. It doesnt matter if there are only 30-40 such members. They need to feel a collective (sorry for using that word, Milton :) ) responsibility for the caucus. At present it is too much of 'some one else will do it' and coordinators are left with an impossible job. <BR><BR>Organizational issues should be dealt by this members list, with free and regular references to the larger group, which consists of those who are interested in the caucus, in the matters of getting information, contributing, and deliberating, but not willing to take much responsibility, which is of course very fine. For most purposes one will never feel the difference while participating in the regular larger group.... it will only be more or less an exceptional thing to take matters to the members group <BR><BR>Otherwise we will keep ending up in some absurd situations of the kind Milton refers to.<BR><BR>I appeal to coordinators to take this issue up. <BR><BR>parminder <BR></FONT><BR>Milton L Mueller wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D78FF5FE97@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu type="cite"><ZZZMETA content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)" name="Generator"><ZZZ!--[IF !mso]>
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
o\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
w\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
.shape {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
</STYLE>
<ZZZ![ENDIF]--><?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = O /><O:SMARTTAGTYPE name="PersonName" namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"><ZZZ!--[IF !mso]>
<STYLE>st1\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#ieooui)
}
</STYLE>
<ZZZ![ENDIF]-->
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Batang;
}
@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@font-face {
font-family: @Batang;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.EmailStyle17 {
COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
</O:SMARTTAGTYPE>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I voted against the amendment, but do not have a problem with the procedure used. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The real problem is that a high bar was set regarding the membership portion who have to vote. If a loose organization such as this attracts 200 people who call themselves “members” at point A and after two years 35% of them lose interest and stop participating, then no charter amendments would ever be possible. If the vote were a close one it would be different, of course. As it is, all that happened was that the vote extension allowed the will of an overwhelming majority to be executed.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV style="BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: medium none; PADDING-LEFT: 4pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: 1.5pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 0in; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none">
<DIV>
<DIV class=MsoNormal style="TEXT-ALIGN: center" align=center><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<HR tabIndex=-1 align=center width="100%" SIZE=2>
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma">From:</SPAN></FONT></B><FONT face=Tahoma size=2><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma"> Magaly Pazello [<A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="mailto:femlists@gmail.com">mailto:femlists@gmail.com</A>] <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Sunday, September 27, 2009 10:00 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> <?XML:NAMESPACE PREFIX = ST1 /><ST1:PERSONNAME w:st="on"><A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A></ST1:PERSONNAME>; Jeffrey A. Williams<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [governance] Results of charter amendment vote</SPAN></FONT><O:P></O:P></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 12pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Dear list,<BR>after a long time I am getting involved with IG issues again. I have been following up the discussions and all other process here in the list despite my silence.<BR><BR>I would like to thanks the list coordinators for all the wok done regarding to the charter amendment as well the other lsit members who have spent time and dedication to make the voting posible. I think nw is time to look forward as the IGF is coming and there is much to do.<BR><BR>I have voted during the regular voting period and all the people I have aproached have received the ballot in time and have voted during this period. But it sems do not be exactly point. Since the number of votes in favor of the charter amendment is very higher in relation to who is against, I think this disparity say much more about the decision of list members to adopt the new text than if all the rules was strictly followed or not. Also because we don't know if the 9 votes against the charter amendment were made within the regular voting period or during the extension period.<BR><BR>I have a question, passing the 72 hours without a proper appeal to the voting process the charter amendment will be definetely adopted, right?<BR><BR>Best,<BR><BR>Magaly Pazello<BR><BR><BR><BR><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">2009/9/27 Jeffrey A. Williams <<A href="mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com" moz-do-not-send="true">jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com</A>><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">Danny and all,<BR><BR> There is certainly more than reasonable evidance to suspect, but not<BR>necessarly prove that gaming of the process has occurred or may have<BR>occurred. Simply extending the voting period alone justifies that<BR>suspicion.<BR><BR> So far the reason given for the extending of the voting period don't<BR>ring very true or reasonable to me, for what ever that's worth to others.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>>From: <ST1:PERSONNAME w:st="on">Danny Younger</ST1:PERSONNAME> <<A href="mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com" moz-do-not-send="true">dannyyounger@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>Sent: Sep 27, 2009 1:05 PM<BR>>To: <A href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org" moz-do-not-send="true">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A>, <ST1:PERSONNAME w:st="on">Ian Peter</ST1:PERSONNAME> <<A href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" moz-do-not-send="true">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</A>><BR>>Subject: Re: [governance] Results of charter amendment vote<BR>><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">>Ian,<BR>><BR>>Thank you for the clarification. Please be advised that I am considering the filing of an appeal owing to the likelihood of procedural irregularities, and would appreciate a few answers to help guide my ultimate decision.<BR>><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">>One gets the impression from your remarks that those that managed the amendment vote process were fully aware that the amendment had failed to pass (owing to a failure to meet the 2/3 threshold requirement) as of the pre-established cut-off date for the voting; these managers then proceeded to put forth a series of justifications to extend the vote in order to obtain the particular outcome that they themselves preferred.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P>
<DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt">><BR>>Is this impression substantially correct? If so, in my view such actions constitute an improper gaming of the process.<BR>><BR>>Best regards,<BR>><ST1:PERSONNAME w:st="on">Danny Younger</ST1:PERSONNAME><BR>><BR>>[...]<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><O:P>Regards,<BR><BR>Jeffrey A. Williams<BR>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders strong!)<BR>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -<BR> Abraham Lincoln<BR><BR>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very<BR>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt<BR><BR>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability<BR>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by<BR>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]<BR>===============================================================<BR>Updated 1/26/04<BR>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of<BR>Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com<BR>Phone: 214-244-4827<BR></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></ZZZBODY></ZZZHTML></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY>