[bestbits] Best Bits MAG nominations for your approval - URGENT

Wed Nov 20 10:59:29 EST 2013

Joana and all,

Unfortunately in the post-Snowden world "trust us" is not a sufficient
answer-only transparency and accountability are.

As long as the Steering Committee is self-appointed through murky procedures
and as long as this self-appointed (Interim or no) Steering Committee
chooses to act (and present itself to the world) as though it has a mandate
to act on behalf of the BB grouping whatever that might be, there will
necessarily and quite reasonably be a lack of trust and questions as to
legitimacy.

There are two solutions, either open up the (Interim) Steering Committee to
self-nominations, or have the (Interim) Steering Committee as its final act
create and execute a (if necessary summary) procedure for selection (and
thus legitimation). 

If there are concerns about the Steering Committee being unworkable then
decision making procedures should be proposed and confirmed by the BB list.

Without the above, issues of legitimacy will, one would anticipate,
undermine any actions/presentations/nominations coming out of BB in any
case.

M

From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
[mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Joana Varon
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 6:09 AM
To: Marianne Franklin
Cc: &lt,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt,
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Best Bits MAG nominations for your approval - URGENT

Dear all, 

Please, allow me to raise a suggestion of the broader procedure: 

I see this issue is getting complicated and sensitive and, particularly
reading Mawaki's email, I sense that there is some misunderstandings that
are particularly coming up from the fact that part of the people in the list
didn't attend BB meeting in Bali and deserve some clarification about what
happened there. 

I know that everybody is really busy as since Bali the pace of events is
accelerated (and on my case particularly overwhelmed with Brazil meeting
issues), but I might be really useful if the steering make a joined effort
to manage to report back from the meeting, particularly about the session on
BB structure, so whoever that reads the wiki procedures will also have this
background info.

In the main while, let's try to trust each other a little bit... I'm pretty
totally comfortable to reaffirm that there is a lot of good will within the
steering, sometime we stumble in procedures, true, we are all testing
methods, its part of the task, but are also truly open for suggestions and
to implement changes. So, please, be sure concerns raised here are being
heard. Let's just not block important things to get done. 

Therefore, I would suggest that we keep this thread to at least have the
list of people that BB would like to suggest, having in mind the issue
raised about indicating or not people that are already there. Deciding if it
is going through IGC or not would be the next (complicated) step. 

all the best

joana

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Marianne Franklin
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk> wrote:

Dear all

Could I suggest that all the names of anyone going up for the MAG from both
current slates (i.e. run by the IGC and being collated through Best Bits) be
posted so that we can inform other networks of who is standing. 

Whether they are looking to stand as an IGC nominee or Best Bits nominee can
be noted. 

Ongoing, and important discussions about the Best Bits governance structure
need to continue, and as a member of the interim BB Steering as well as
co-Chair of the IRP Coalition I support the need for clarity here too. But
right at this moment as the list and candidates form, it would be good for
anyone else considering standing for the MAG to know who is currently doing
so. If a person is standing in two places could they nominate which one they
are opting for too to save space and time?

Also, I join those affirmations of the work done by all standing MAG
members, in this case from civil society, who are continuing. Thank you all
for the hard and often unrewarded and unrelenting work on this group. 

best
MF

On 20/11/2013 10:17, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:

(Replying from phone.) I had suggested off this list that we omit any
mention of the incumbent MAG members and limit our candidates to those who
will fill slots that will be open anyway. If we clarify that we support the
continuation of the candidates who are eligible for continuing, and drop the
specific candidates mentioned, this may help?

--  

Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com

Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek 

host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'

WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to
enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For instructions, see
http://jere.my/l/8m.

On 20 Nov 2013, at 6:10 pm, Poncelet Ileleji <pileleji at ymca.gm> wrote:

Hello Colleagues,

Good day, I think its important for continuity especially as in my opinion
the current CS MAG members are doing a great work and have really put in a
lot of time to this  , I concur will Bill and strongly belief in the overall
continuity of all current CS MAG members

Regards

Poncelet

On 20 November 2013 10:05, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

Hi 

Just woke up and am rushing to a meeting but would appreciate clarification.
When was the call for nominations, when was the deadline for submission, and
when was the period in which list members then expressed views either way
before you decided to go ahead?  Some of us are a bit busy in Buenos Aires
dealing with Brazil meeting and such and are awash in a tidal wave of
communications and meetings, so I at least missed all this.  

By selecting these six names, including just two current CS MAG members, do
you wish to convey to the Secretariat and DESA that you do not support the
continued participation of all the current CS MAG members not listed,
irrespective of the time and work they've put in, how long they've been been
on it, etc?

It seems unduly abrupt, so please note my objection as well.

Thanks

Bill

On Nov 20, 2013, at 4:15 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

On 20 Nov 2013, at 1:25 pm, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

As said before, I do not agree to steering committee choosing MAG nominees,
or other kinds of reps, or next steering committee's membership, and so
on.... These are serious. important issues which should have a clear,
transparent, accountable and thus legitimate process around it. And I dont
see that in place.

We have not chosen the MAG nominees, we have simply collected the
nominations, suggested criteria that could be used to evaluate them, and
forwarded them back to the main list with a recommendation.  Although your
objection was noted, most others were comfortable with this process and
since we do not have voting or membership as such, we decided to go ahead.
If appropriate your objection could probably be noted in some way in the
letter that goes to the MAG.

-- 

Dr Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Policy Officer
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599> 

Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement knowledge hub
|http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone

@Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/>  |
www.facebook.com/consumersinternational

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> . Don't print
this email unless necessary.

WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to
enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For instructions, see
<http://jere.my/l/8m> http://jere.my/l/8m.

____________________________________________________________
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

-- 
Poncelet O. Ileleji MBCS
Coordinator
The Gambia YMCAs Computer Training Centre & Digital Studio
MDI Road Kanifing South
P. O. Box 421 Banjul
The Gambia, West Africa
Tel: (220) 4370240
Fax:(220) 4390793
Cell:(220) 9912508
Skype: pons_utd
www.ymca.gm
www.waigf.org
www.aficta.org
www.itag.gm
www.npoc.org
http://www.wsa-mobile.org/node/753
www.diplointernetgovernance.org

____________________________________________________________
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

-- 
Professor Marianne Franklin
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition (UN IGF)
Goldsmiths, University of London
Dept. of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 20 7919 7072 <tel:%2B44%2020%207919%207072> 
 <mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
https://twitter.com/GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
https://www.gold.ac.uk/pg/ma-global-media-transnational-communications/
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
@netrights

____________________________________________________________
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

-- 
-- 

Joana Varon Ferraz
@joana_varon
PGP 0x016B8E73

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131120/a7e54dee/attachment.htm>