[bestbits] [governance] IMPORTANT : Merging IGC with Best Bits

[Jeremy Malcolm]

On 1/10/19 2:01 AM, Sheetal Kumar wrote:

> For those who were part of the first Steering Committee of Bestbits -
> could you share more information about how it was constituted and why?


It was because IGC discourse had become toxic and dysfunctional, and
people were dropping out. It had been a while since it had been able to
agree on a joint statement. At the same time, the 2012 ITU WCIT was
coming up, and being able to collaborate on joint action was important,
so a few conversations between people both inside and outside of IGC
resulted in them becoming the first volunteer steering committee.

But then the same civil society politics that had driven the IGC into
the ground started to disrupt Best Bits too. There were (misplaced but
damaging) allegations about various participants having hidden agendas
or not being transparent enough about their own funding. So whereas the
original committee had been fairly lightweight and informal, pressure to
adopt more formal mechanisms of accountability resulted in us investing
a lot of time in creating a more elaborate set of rules and processes.
As it turned out, this was too heavy and people weren't motivated to
engage in these new processes, indicating that the more lightweight
structure had probably been better.

If there was a group of willing people who could resuscitate Best Bits,
even without formal elections, I'd be all for that. But I don't think
there is. I personally have given as much time to it as I'd like to
give, because I'm focusing my energy on my new nonprofit Prostasia
Foundation now.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
echo "9EEAi^^;6C6]>J^=^>6"|tr '\!-~' 'P-~\!-O'|wget -q -i - -O -