[bestbits] [discuss] [governance] Meeting in São Paulo on Friday, January 10th, is between the LOG and 1Net
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Fri Jan 10 12:21:48 EST 2014
On Friday 10 January 2014 10:36 PM, Anja Kovacs wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> As I agree that the exact relation between 1net and the organisation
> of the Brazilian meeting remains a topic of considerable confusion
> (including on the 1net email lists), I have requested that the 1net
> steering committee seeks clarification from the LOC on what its
> expectations vis-a-vis 1net are once the Committees are in place. If
> the LOC has no further expectations at that point, and if the 1net
> steering committee also sees no role for itself, the current tension
> will automatically defuse, as 1net would then automatically move into
> the background, at least where the organisational aspects of the
> meeting are concerned (it would hopefully still contribute to the
> substance!). The committee appointments should be known in about 5
> days time.
>
> If the LOC does have further expectations, I think that time would be
> a good moment to more formally reassess our stance - through whatever
> process deemed most appropriate.
Anja
I am sure you have followed the facts of the case whereby it has not
been what LOG expected of 1Net, but what 1Net, or whoever drives 1Net,
has consistently and insistently tried to extract from LOG... you know
that 1Net begun even in Bali to assume roles about the Brazil meeting
which made Brazilians extremely uncomfortable, and that then in Dec
Adiel made the unilateral declaration that 1Net will be the conduit to
Brazil organising committees, whereby later on 27th dec LOG pushed 1Net
back and announced more or less that Adiel's announcement was wrong and
unauthorised and that LOG will directly deal with different
stakeholder processes... whatever happened between that meeting and the
latest LOG meeting in the first week of Jan, but then 1Net was again
the one conduit...
Why do you think we should ignore all this publicly known stuff and
innocently assume that it is LOG which is pressuring poor 1Net into
different roles. This is pretty strange to me...
parminder
>
> Whatever happens, if at some point it is decided that working through
> the 1net SC is acceptable on some issues in the preparation for this
> event, I disagree that that means 1net will automatically become the
> default platform for all CS representation in the future, as some seem
> to fear. The exact shape that 1net will take is something that is
> still to be determined, and it is up to all of us to provide input
> into that - and up to us as 1net SC members from CS to make sure that
> you all remain informed of any relevant proposals etc. so that we can
> collectively frame timely responses as needed.
>
> FYI, the archives of the 1net SC mailing list are public, and can be
> accessed here: http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/steercom/
>
> Best,
> Anja
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10 January 2014 20:09, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org
> <mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>> wrote:
>
> On 10 Jan 2014, at 7:18 pm, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:
>
>> I just want others to tell their clear views as well.... Not tell
>> us that well this is what has already happened and so.... But
>> what is their preferences (and what was it at Bali, and if there
>> is a change of view, some clarification will be extremely helpful).
>>
>> I also agree with Bill that we should stop causing confusion, and
>> clearly arrive at a view and tell it to the outside world.
>
> Sorry for the apparent confusion. The process has certainly been
> made clear to Adiel, to the LOG, and we thought it has also been
> made clear to the respective lists, but evidently not. So let me
> restate my understanding of it:
>
> * The 1net representatives are separate from the Brazil meeting
> representatives, because 1net aims to be an ongoing dialogue
> whereas the Brazil meeting is a discrete event.
> * Following from point 1, it was never stated or anticipated
> that the 1net steering committee reps would themselves appoint
> the Brazil committee reps, and they were not selected in the
> expectation that do such a thing.
> * Rather, the civil society IG coordination group has handled
> (or is handling) the process for nominations. (We do realise
> that Michael Gurstein is not happy about this, nor is he happy
> about 1net, or Best Bits, or....)
> * As for the four liaisons that we appointed in Brazil, they
> took /interim/ roles in liaising both with the 1net group and
> the Brazil organisers, but these interim appointments are
> superseded as more permanent appointments are made - initially
> of the new 1net steering committee representatives, and
> (pending) the representatives on the two Brazil committees.
> * The fact that the LOG has asked that the nominations for the
> Brazil committees go through the 1net committee initially
> flummoxed us because it flew in the face of what we thought we
> had clearly told them about our process. But Ian's response
> is that we will send our selections directly to the LOG, and
> also (as a courtesy, if you like) to the 1net committee.
>
>
> Hopefully this clarifies the process, and sorry that it wasn't
> clear enough already. Parminder I realise that point 5 above is
> likely unsatisfactory to you because it doesn't firmly break the
> plank of legitimacy that the LOG has extended to 1net, but... it's
> intended as a bit of a compromise.
>
> Ian can clarify further if needs be, since he is the chair of the
> coordination group.
>
> --
>
> *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
>
> 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
> <http://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.
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> --
> Dr. Anja Kovacs
> The Internet Democracy Project
>
> +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs
> www.internetdemocracy.in <http://www.internetdemocracy.in/>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140110/4aed62c9/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list