[bestbits] Steering Group - who are we?

Sun Nov 3 07:50:18 EST 2013

PS

Correction: I am NOT claiming to be speaking for others!

(this omission was not a Freudian slip...!)

best
MF

On 03/11/2013 12:47, Marianne Franklin wrote:
> Dear all
>
> I have taken the liberty of revising the original thread title to 
> address Parminder's request for more clarity about the BB steering 
> group, at least from my perspective.
>
> It is an interim steering group in that a number of us (self)nominated 
> or were nominated to join. I have been on there in an individual 
> capacity but also on behalf of the IRP Coalition, both capacities 
> still on an interim basis as setting up Best Bits was done quite 
> quickly and to date indeed many decisions and actions have taken place 
> at a fast tempo.
>
> So, as is the case with all the various networks we are all 
> participating in I look forward to this interim group becoming an 
> endorsed or elected one for all the reasons that Parminder and others 
> have noted.
>
> To the Statement that Best Bets has authored; this statement, drafted 
> at the Best Bits pre-IGF meeting in Bali, was indeed released without 
> all of the Steering Group being present. As it is now a baseline 
> document for ongoing discussions it now being public can hopefully 
> focus those discussions as the ICANN-Brazil Summit meeting remains as 
> yet unclear in terms of participation and intent. To this end, the 
> report that Joana Varon and others compiled of the Bali meetings is 
> very helpful for us all to consider.
>
> To me, thinking back over several months of intense email traffic and 
> output emerging from the Best Bits initiative, perhaps the adage "more 
> haste, less speed" might be one we could apply within the interim 
> steering group and as a wider network that dovetails with many others. 
> Ignoring or overlooking these many others is not the best way forward 
> in the long run, and it is the long run that matters I think even if 
> things appear to be happening at breakneck speed. Appearances can be 
> deceiving!
>
> Hope this clarifies things from one Best Bits Steering group member 
> perspective; I am claiming here to speak for all others. In terms of 
> my current responsibility towards informing the IRP Coalition of key 
> Best Bits outputs, the current steering group is working on these 
> procedures as indeed we must.
>
> best
> MF
>
>
>
> On 03/11/2013 06:36, parminder wrote:
>>
>> On Saturday 26 October 2013 05:23 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>> On 26 Oct 2013, at 11:53 am, parminder at itforchange.net 
>>> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Yes it is the same, with those suggestions incorporated, and reviewed.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the information, Jeremy...
>>>>
>>>> Who reviewed and incorporated the suggestions, and 'finalised' the 
>>>> statement.
>>>
>>> The steering committee (except Marianne who presented apologies) at 
>>> a meeting the previous night.
>>
>> In fact, the lack of clarity of the process is so high that I no 
>> longer know who are members of steering committee... Dont  those who 
>> consider themselves members of the BB group kind of need to know such 
>> basic stuff...
>>
>> One process issue that was raised repeatedly at the BB f2f meeting 
>> was about clarity about steering committee members and where they 
>> 'came from'..... there was a demand that their association with 
>> groups/ organisation etc be very clear, along with nature of funding 
>> support etc, and I would add - if not explicit on the respective 
>> websites - a basic statement of organisational objectives, vision/ 
>> mission etc, and list of activities and the such...
>>
>> parminder
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> My only suggestion was not incorporated - neither responded to... 
>>>
>>> That, though, was just an oversight - I really apologise for that. I 
>>> actually thought that we had incorporated the only two outstanding 
>>> points and evidently overlooked this one, or thought it had already 
>>> been incorporated.
>>>
>>> Somewhat explaining this lapse, we were very pressed for time as we 
>>> wanted it to go public on the last day of the IGF, and by that time 
>>> the BB server was already down, though I didn't yet realise how 
>>> badly. I spent a few hours that night trying to bring it back up.
>>>
>>>> It was
>>>> regarding the main operative part of the sentence - the second 
>>>> sentence -
>>>> which seek multistakeholder model of holding the conference. I had
>>>> proposed that we instead ask specifically for civil society to be 
>>>> an equal
>>>> partner in all processes of holding the conference..... 
>>>
>>> However I do think this is covered pretty well anyway, if you take 
>>> the statement as a whole.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> 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 <http://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.
>>>
>>
>
> -- 
> Dr Marianne Franklin
> Reader
> 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
> <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

-- 
Dr Marianne Franklin
Reader
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
<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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131103/6ae1680c/attachment.htm>