<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#CCCCCC">
IGC List,<br>
<br>
Over the past few days several suggestions have been made that a new
approach be taken by civil society toward MAG membership
nominations. Robert Guerra initiated the idea, and the undersigned
+1'd it adding that a "joint-board" might be a viable mechanism for
implementation. <br>
<br>
Some responded as if the suggestion was that IGC oversee this
joint-board. It was not my intention that this entity be overseen or
controlled by the IGC. Rather, I imagined IGC as one member of the
joint-board. <br>
<br>
Avri added that Diplo "had the most rigorous process" and named APC
as a third organization that submitted names to MAG last year. <br>
<br>
While a list compiled by a joint-board would initially be considered
"just a suggestion" to DESA, its timely formulation under a rigorous
process might one day raise its status to that of a "good
suggestion" or better. Over time, if such a joint-board's processes
are looked upon favorably by MAG and civil society, perhaps such a
joint-board could become a key clearinghouse for qualified civil
society nominees. (Note: I suspect (hope) the MAG nomination process
would remain open to names submitted by individuals and other
organizations.)<br>
<br>
Creating such an entity will require some reflection and we are
faced with a 14 day deadline for submitting names to MAG. Last
year's IGC MAG selection process was less than smooth and we ended
up submitting a list and endorsing the APC submissions (if I recall
properly). Already 2 members of last year's NomCom have recused
themselves from the proposed "extended" NomCom, and I, as the
non-voting chair of that committee am not overly confident of having
adequate time to add to the committee, receive nominations, and
review them in two weeks. I suppose we could ask for an extension,
but that highlights our predicament.<br>
<br>
Is there a mechanism for endorsing another list or lists of
nominees? And what about starting on that joint-board?<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Tom Lowenhaupt <br>
<br>
<hr size="2" width="100%">On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:avri@acm.org">avri@acm.org</a> wrote:<br>
<pre wrap="">Put another way, last time at least APC, Diplo, and IGC sent lists, of which I think Diplo had the most rigorous process. i am sure there were many others (anyone have a tally of how many civil society lists were submitted). I would assume that no matter how much someone tries to insist their group is the principle aggregator, others will send their own lists.
</pre>
On 1/6/2013 2:50 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:<br>
<blockquote>As the "fill-in" chair of last year's MAG nomcom, I was
quite disappointed to learn that ours was just one of the lists
from civil society that was submitted to the MAG. I would not
advocate for the creation of an official list by a MAG designated
body (a channel for self nominations by outsiders is helpful), but
submissions from a scattering of civil society sources puts too
much power in the hands of MAG central to pick and choose. A
submission by a civil society "joint- board" seems worth
considering.<br>
</blockquote>
On 1/5/2013 11:04 AM, Robert Guerra wrote:
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"> civil society should coordinate among
itself and send a single list of names it "recommends" to the UN.
Competing lists, lessen the impact of the IGC on the decision
making process </blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<br>
</body>
</html>