[bestbits] Fwd: [discuss] /1net Steering/Coordination Commitee

[Adam Peake]

A request for civil society to provide names by the end of the year (11 days) for two committees.  Carlos' email below, but quote:

"2-3 names for the HL committee and 2 names for the exec committee as, soon as possible (before this year ends)"

These committees are described in the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee's announcement of November 26 <http://www.nic.br/imprensa/releases/2013/rl-2013-62.htm> as:

1. High-Level Multistakeholder Committee: Responsible for conducting the political articulation and fostering the involvement of the international community.
2. Executive Multistakeholder Committee: Responsible for organizing the event, including the agenda discussion and execution, and for the treatment of the proposals from participants and different stakeholders; 

Adam



Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
> Date: December 20, 2013 10:01:48 PM GMT+09:00
> To: Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>
> Cc: discuss at 1net.org
> Subject: Re: [discuss] /1net Steering/Coordination Commitee
> 
> Hi people,
> 
> Writing as a member of the local organizing group (LOG): we are
> extremely worried because time is an independent variable and we badly
> need a clear definition from all stakeholders as soon as possible.
> 
> To CS: please forget about the other stakeholders (they have their own
> challenges and they will have to solve them). If CS is going to restart
> the infighting to define representing names, now on who will sit at the
> 1Net Steering Committee, instead of building upon the imperfect but
> reasonable process we managed to do so far, you will be pushing LOG into
> a corner as we have to define the committees ASAP.
> 
> LOG must have the two main committees (high level and executive)
> basically defined by the end of this year. My *personal suggestion* is:
> CS accepts for the 1Net Steering Committee the nominating group which we
> defined for the Icann HL meeting, as proposed now. We will of course be
> able to keep an eye on them as we usually do. And let CS try and define
> the 2-3 names for the HL committee and 2 names for the exec committee as
> soon as possible (before this year ends).
> 
> LOG agreed 1Net will be the conduit to send the names of all non-gov
> sectors to it, since there is representation of all sectors in their
> Steering Committee.
> 
> BTW, in this (imperfect) way CS will be *far better* than the business
> community in terms of all balances. And please recall that the meeting
> is planned for about 1,000 participants, so plenty of space to come to
> SP and participate.
> 
> []s fraternos with eyes on the ticking clock...
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> On 12/20/2013 09:14 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
>> Well dear fellow multistakeholders,
>> 
>> Here is the state of play as we enter the holiday period.
>> 
>> Business community chooses the biggest and richest without thought for
>> balance.
>> 
>> Technical community needs more time to get the job done.
>> 
>> Academic community works hard on deciding what an academic is.
>> 
>> Civil society implodes.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> All sounds like business as usual to me (but maybe my cynicism will wear
>> off by morning).
>> 
>> 
>> I am not going to bore this list with a description of the civil society
>> processes that came up with a very good representative set of names. If
>> you want to know about the processes adopted, read the IGC or Best Bits
>> archives (or email me). Having worked with the various civil society
>> groups as an independent facilitator, I can tell you that the civil
>> society reps involved knew their processes were imperfect, had little or
>> no time to do anything about it, but ploughed ahead to come up with a
>> very good and widely accepted result.
>> 
>> Those chosen for civil society were selected for their capacity to
>> represent all of civil society, not just their own organisations, and to
>> work collegiately with other stakeholder groups. In a less talented
>> field perhaps Klaus or Michael, both of whom were candidates, might have
>> been chosen.
>> 
>> Anyway
>> 
>> All the best to you all and I look forward to some positive advances in
>> the new year!
>> 
>> Ian Peter
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss