[bestbits] IMPORTANT: World Economic Forum and The-Initiative-Formerly-Known-As-NETmundial

[Gene Kimmelman]

I agree with Anja.


On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Anja Kovacs <anja at internetdemocracy.in>
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Glad to see the clarification on the role if the committee here. I think
> ideally, the committee should not have attended the meeting, but should
> have passed on the invitation to the CS people who participated in the
> earlier meeting, who could have then passed on the relevant details to all
> of us, and we could have deliberated on the whether question following
> that. The CSCG was put into place simply to make nominations for processes
> we have already agreed that we want to get involved in, and unless
> otherwise agreed by the wider networks involved in it, should stick to that
> role in my opinion.
>
> On the actual question of whether we should put forward representatives
> collectively: I think we should not, as this gives a multistakeholder
> veneer to a process that isn't (and when I say 'multistakeholder', I think
> of a process that very clearly adheres to the IG principles outlined in the
> NETmundial outcome document). It also means that we give legitimacy to the
> WEF as a venue to unite us all, which I don't want to do.
>
> That doesn't mean, though, that I think civil society shouldn't be part of
> this. I would be happy for organisations already involved in this, if they
> are ready, to continue their work, including of informing us all, which I
> think they have done well and which I have greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks and best,
> Anja
> On Sep 4, 2014 11:43 PM, "Norbert Bollow" <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 04 Sep 2014 12:02:42 +0200
>> Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:
>>
>> > A second point, if the opposition of one member of the the CSCG would
>> > be enough for the SCSG to do its work, this would lend a very strong
>> > veto power to single members. In that case we would need a discussion
>> > of which groups and political positions we want to see represented on
>> > the SCSG.
>>
>> So far CSCG's internal processes have worked reasonably well on the
>> basis of consensus-based decision-making, by which I mean that not
>> only will a proposed decision only become a decision in the absence of
>> objections, but also that everyone works together constructively
>> towards reaching consensus, i.e. there is an implied social contract of
>> not abusing the possibility of objecting.
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Norbert
>> JNC co-convenor and JNC's representative in CSCG.
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140905/5a1bbb91/attachment.htm>