<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div dir="ltr"><span style="border-collapse:separate;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:'Times New Roman';border-spacing:0px;font-size:medium"><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial;font-size:small"><div>
Dear JFC, <br></div></span></span></div>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 11:01 PM, JFC Morfin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jefsey@jefsey.com" target="_blank">jefsey@jefsey.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">Dear Mawaki,<br>
two comments:<br>
<br>
At 20:28 10/11/2013, Mawaki Chango wrote:<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
#3 That procedure does not have to be carried out publicly on a discussion list such as these ones --for, among other things, the safety reasons and possible risks that have already been mentioned. A structure may be put in place (NomCom?) to receive such statements.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div><div class="im">
We know from experience there only are public discussions, with the help of NSA and/or wikileaks and co. As E.S (Eric Schmidt, not Edward Snowden) puts it: if you do not want something to be published on the internet do not do it.<br>
</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Right! Except that I am pretty sure whatever people would have to disclose in a case like this would have been already communicated through some other email exchanges, say, between them and their sources of funding. I believe it's always a trade-off between the stake (and benefit) one has in finding out and the cost of finding out. That cost is somehow raised by sending the information to a limited group of trusted professional individuals, and further raised by encrypted the concerned communications. But there will never going to be 100 per cent secrecy, we agree on that. <br>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">
<br>
<br>
</div><div class="im"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
there are basically three ways for having money: i) you sell something, goods or services; ii) you tax someone else; or iii) someone chooses to give you the money for whatever reason, possibly including a service you didn't even set out to sell. In CS we do at least a little bit of the three --through grant proposals or consultancy, member dues (albeit with less dire consequences than defaulting on your income tax), and fundraising or donations CS orgs receive. But it looks like the latter category is what supports the most CS advocacy activities. That makes you think twice about where we actually are on the power map. Maybe there is some solace to be found in the fact that many of the sources CS orgs get money from are also part of CS, to begin with: private citizens who once were industrious enough and with enough ingenuity to become wealthy and set up foundations or other charity orgs. Short of that, CS would perhaps have to receive the bulk of its money from the people who tax other people.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div><div class=""><div class="h5">
The origin of the money is not a problem. The problem is the non-disclosure. </div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Again, agree with that. That's why the above section of my message you're referring to was not integrated as part of my core points but in manner of concluding reflection. And I mentioned the perspective that it provides about CS in terms of our place on the power map. That was all my observation was intended for, no more no less. <br>
<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div class="h5">There are several ways around that can be explored:<br>
<br>
* a CS oath, as for the Olympics.<br>
* the sponsorship to be disclosed at registration.<br>
* the creation of a CSFoundation to collect and attribute fundings in a fairly ballanced manner and published policy.<br>
Its CSnomcom list would gather reps from all the participating CS organizations.<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Interesting suggestions, especially the last one. Isn't that the model BB's approach is hinting at (except that it is not a foundation and it's limited to BB coalition/ participants/ members --whatever applies)? I'm just asking... While a significant portion of groups like these are organizations with their own funding and programs for working (if only partly) on things that are related to issues we are concerned with here, individual membership are just are valuable and as legitimate. Therefore, it becomes clear to me that there is some discrepancy to reckon with in claiming some identity --as in "global CS"-- for these groups if there is no funding mechanisms (and clear governance mechanisms, for that matter) at that same level of such global identity. Otherwise, as is currently the case, we become at critical moments of decisions and actions reduced to an opportune coalition of whoever has gotten the resources to show up, without any sense of representativeness whatsoever.<br>
<br></div><div>Best,<br><br></div><div>Mawaki </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class=""><div class="h5">
<br>
jfc <br>
<br>
</div></div><br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>