[bestbits] Report back with some options for open/closed lists

[Deborah Brown]

Dear all,

Taking into account the debate here about using a civil society only list
for strategic discussions, I'm reporting back from some discussions among
the interim steering committee* on different options for moving forward.
Here are the some options we came up with:

   1. Everything on the public list (i.e. status quo)
   2. Using the open list as the default, and have the option of moving
   strategic conversations to the private list
   3. Using the open list as the default, and starting issue-specific lists
   for strategic discussions among civil society. This would follow the model
   of the [EC] list that was used to prepare Best Bits' submission to WGEC
   (welcoming suggestions to improve that model). Drafting and strategic
   discussions took place on the closed list and were reported back to the
   main list.

Most of us on steering prefer option 3, but we could not come to an
agreement on whether or not the archives of emails on civil society list
should be public or only available to the members of the list. The benefits
of having public archives would be  transparency and avoiding the exclusion
of anyone who wanted to join the list but was not aware of it. The drawback
would be that public archives would diminish the value of the list as a
private space for civil society to strategize.

What we propose is to try out the subject-specific list option with a new
list for the Brazil meeting (i.e. summit at lists.bestbits.net) and invite
anyone who is interested in participating and who self-identifies as civil
society to join. Trying to use the broadest definition of civil society, we
would suggest that those whose primary affiliation is with a government, an
intergovernmental organization, or corporation not join. Since this is of
course an imperfect definition, we propose to leave it open to all to
subscribe and have an open discussion around any issues regarding
membership that may arise.

In particular we are interested in:

   - What people think about the 3 options
   - Public v. private archives for the subject-specific list option
   - The proposal to move forward with summit at lists.bestbits.net
   - If you think that there may be another workable model we missed
   (please suggest it!)

Please send your feedback, ideas, concerns by the end of the week if
possible either on this thread or to steering at lists.bestbits.net.

We hope this reflects the different points of view that have been expressed
the regarding the need for a civil society only space to strategize and the
need to be inclusive, transparent, and accountable . Looking forward to a
constructive discussion and to collaborating around the challenges ahead.

Kind regards,
Deborah

*Note: the following individuals are members of the interim steering
committee Andrew Puddephatt (Global Partners), Anja Kovacs (Internet and
Democracy Project), Deborah Brown (Access), Jeremy Malcolm (Consumers
International), Joana Varon Ferraz (FGV/CTS), Marianne Franklin
(individual/IRP coalition), Nnenna (World Wide Web Foundation) and Valeria
Betancourt (APC).
-- 
Deborah Brown
Senior Policy Analyst
Access | accessnow.org
rightscon.org

@deblebrown
PGP 0x5EB4727D
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131112/e752d4d9/attachment.htm>