[bestbits] Call to Best Bits participants for nominations to Brazil meeting committees

[Mawaki Chango]

On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 12:24 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 24-Dec-13 03:18, Mawaki Chango wrote:
>
>> "Don't worry getting yourself out of poverty by trying to speak for
>> yourself (for instance, by trying to expose the structural imbalances
>> that maintain the conditions causing poverty,) just be content with us
>> taking care of your needs as we understand them (by maintaining and
>> feeding in the public aid apparatus so that you can get something to eat
>> everyday while we enjoy self-gratification for doing good)."
>>
>
>
> Well I suppose you can read anything, any way you wish, I contend that
> your reading is a prejudicial and specious misconstruction.
>
> I said nothing about people not arguing their case as vociferously as they
> might wish.  And I said nothing about not applying for a representative
> role.
>
> What I said is that when one accepts a representative role, they go on to
> represent the whole group and not just the one particular set of beliefs
> and agendas they come in with.
>
> And what I think is wrong is getting a position as a CS representative and
> then doing everything you can to put forward your personal agenda at the
> cost of the rest of civil society's positions.  Sure make sure your
> position gets heard and understood as well as is possible, just don't do it
> by by tearing down the work everyone else is trying to do as well. This
> means that you have to pick people who despite having a minority view can
> work with the majority as well.
>
> So sure put in the criterion of including minority viewpoints, but also
> put in the criterion of "plays well with others."



Well, that was my point, and I believe your latter criterion/qualification
is taken care in one way or the other by the first 3 out of 6 criteria
already applicable.

1.      Able to represent civil society as a whole, not just your
individual civil society organisation(s)

2.      Able to work collegiately with other stakeholder groups in a
multistakeholder setting

3.      Able to consult widely with civil society groups and to report back
as the process progresses


 And your earlier opposition to the newly proposed criterion did not make
your more balanced position stated above any clearer than my reading of
your arguments was "prejudicial and specious."

mawaki

>
>
> avri
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131224/e2f37e5c/attachment.htm>