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

[Jeanette Hofmann]

Such debates about principles have never been helpful in this 
environment. Without reference to specific cases or concrete rules they 
appear hollow and create irritation.
I wish we could agree to discuss the issues and positions we want to see 
represented on any of those committees and pick the people who are able 
to present them well.

jeanette


Am 25.12.13 14:17, schrieb William Drake:
>
> On Dec 25, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Guru गुरु <Guru at ITforChange.net
> <mailto:Guru at ITforChange.net>> wrote:
>
>> Bill
>>
>> On 12/24/2013 07:58 PM, William Drake wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> On Dec 23, 2013, at 3:54 PM, Guru गुरु <guru at itforchange.net
>>> <mailto:guru at itforchange.net>> wrote:
>>>
>> snip
>>>
>>> One logic could be that many people who believe their views to be
>>> consistent with advancing the interests of
>>> the underrepresented/marginalized would have opposing positions on
>>> how to do that.  So how then does one select on this criteria, other
>>> than based on the views of the selectors, who’s the most aggressive
>>> and persistent, etc?
>>>
>>> Neither Jeanette, Avri or I are saying CS shouldn’t be concerned
>>> about ensuring representation of underrepresented/marginalized
>>> views/groups, but rather that this is a hard criteria to apply in a
>>> fair and neutral manner in a nomination process.
>>
>> its problematic to believe some criteria though important, are
>> difficult to apply and can be avoided - (be aware) this is ideology of
>> 'club membership' (re gurstein's mail) in operation.
>
> What a surprise to to hear that your ideology thinks it knows all about
> my ideology and can explain my every utterance based on its preferred
> willful misconstruction thereof.
>>
>> snip
>>> In contrast, the ability to work well with other stakeholders,
>>
>> what seems so easily fair to you, is perhaps just your ideology in
>> operation
>
> Or at least your ideology’s misconstruction of my ideology.
>
> My, what a productive conversation.
>>
>> It would be useful for you to reflect on how much this ideology played
>> a role in your being selected for the High Level Panel process as an
>> “expert” advisor, while Milton Muller (who is known to speak his mind
>> without worrying about 'being nice') was actually one of the CS
>> nominees to the High Level Panel.
>>
>> (this may seem below the belt, request you to reflect on it in a
>> non-personal manner)
>
> No, it is entirely what I would expect of what you and what Parminder
> would call “your ilk”—a pathetic attempt at misrepresentation of readily
> knowable facts in order to score cheap political points.
>
> In any event, this enlightening exchange underscored the concerns Avri
> raised your criteria's likely abuse in the service of a narrow ideology
> and the value of considering representatives who are inclined to
> interact with others in a civil and professional manner.
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
>
> *******************************************************************
> William J. Drake
> International Fellow & Lecturer
>    Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
>    University of Zurich, Switzerland
> Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency,
>    ICANN, www.ncuc.org <http://www.ncuc.org>
> william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch> (direct),
> wjdrake at gmail.com <mailto:wjdrake at gmail.com> (lists),
> www.williamdrake.org <http://www.williamdrake.org>
> ********************************************************************
>