[bestbits] Re: [governance] BB listers and IGC listers

[Norbert Bollow]

Nnenna Nwakanma <nnenna75 at gmail.com> wrote:

> > (I would not object to my name being included e.g. on a document
> > listing "people who have made a great number of mailing list
> > postings", since the creation of such a document would be
> > justifiable on the basis of the transparency principle that I have
> > mentioned above. But such justification does not apply to a
> > document that includes people who are subscribed simply out of a
> > desire to be informed.)
>
> The study did not include "Reasons for being on BB and IGC". Are you
> suggesting we further it?

No. I thought I was very clear that I was suggesting that the creation
of a specific, different kind of document was unjustifiable, and
that I insisted that my personal information be removed from it.

> That will mean a kind of survey. But I find
> the idea actually tempting.  That may just be the kind of knowledge
> that may help build the CS.

For the purpose of understanding whether there is significant "double
dipping", i.e. figuring out whether there is a significant number of
people who feel represented (in some sense) both by a BestBits delegate
to a civil society coordination group and by an IGC delegate, a survey
would certainly make much more sense than to just compare who is
subscribed.

I certainly wouldn't want the fact that I have been a subscriber of the
BestBits list since pretty much its beginning to be interpreted as
wanting to be represented in any way by a "BestBits" representative
to some civil society coordination group. Quite on the contrary, I'd
like to give my input to such processes either directly or through the
IGC. I'm not at all interested in what has been called "double dipping"
even if I'm subscribed to both mailing lists.

I think however (and this was for me a main reason for resigning from
IGC coordinatorship) that IGC needs to get its act together before it
can credibly provide any further input to any civil society coordination
process; until IGC has overcome its current paralysis, the "double
dipping" concern is rather pointless anyway, and it also doesn't make
sense to ask people in a survey whether they wish to be represented
through IGC in any civil society coordination process.

> I did not "create" as such, I only pulled information that is
> available. Anybody can do the same work. I gave the sources. Mailing
> list archives are open by default and the members' list is available
> to all members, no?

Even when that information is available to all subscribers, that does
not imply that it is available for every purpose.

When someone is subscribed to a mailing list but not posting, they
don't show up in the archives, and after they unsubscribe, the mailing
list server will not disclose who was subscribed in the past. So in the
case of a country changing so that it becomes dangerous to be known as
a BestBits or IGC mailing list subscriber, people who were subscribed
just to be informed (without posting themselves) can unsubscribe (and
possibly, if they're willing to take the associated risks, resubscribe
under a pseudonym). That possibility gets destroyed by creating and
sharing static documents that document who was subscribed at a specific
point in time.

But regardless of whether this argument convinces you or not, please
simply respect the fact that I do not want my personal information to
be included in that "study" document.

Greetings,
Norbert