[governance] APC - Forum draft?

[Jacqueline Morris]

I thought that the plan was for a smallish WGIG-like group to start it
up, in consultation with the wider society, then the Forum itself
would be the "open room" where anyone could go and raise issues etc -
hundreds, maybe thousands of members. With of course a small
secretariat/steering group to manage the logistics of, for example,
compiling the discussions into a document that people can agree to,
etc.
The APC doc seems to mix up the 2. But I think that we HAVE to have
the openness of the second open forum for it to have legitimacy,
otherwise the excluded will continue to have the problems that the
Forum is meant to address...
Jacqueline

On 11/10/05, Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org> wrote:
> Jeanette Hofmann ha scritto:
> > This I find slightly confusing. Are you really talking about a _forum_
> > or a new working group, say, a WGIG 2? I thought of a forum in terms of
> > a much larger membership and a more open process than the 40 members of
> > WGIG and its public consultations.
>
> I agree - I think it's really, first of all, a wording problem. Until
> now, we always thought of the Forum like a sort of "open room"
> (physically and online) where everyone could step in and talk, and there
> was then some discussion on whether a WGIG-like "steering / executive
> group" would be desirable to ensure coordination and, as you point out,
> weighed decision making when necessary. It seems to me that the APC
> proposal collapses the Forum into the group, i.e. defines as "forum"
> what we always discussed as the "steering group".
>
> This IMHO lacks the perception of the broad involvement and bottom-up
> participation that is necessary for this process to start and succeed.
> Saying that bottom-up self-organization is dangerous because more
> organized stakeholders might occupy more space than the others is true,
> but is also a consideration that belongs (no offense implied) to the
> top-down, centrally planned 20th century government processes, rather
> than to the bottom-up, distributed, cooperation-based 21st century
> governance processes that we aim to design.
>
> If the UN really established a closed group in a way that anyone felt
> excluded, the only result would be for the Internet to route around it.
> Inclusiveness is not just a precondition for legitimacy - it is a
> precondition for success.
> --
> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>


--
Jacqueline Morris
www.carnivalondenet.com
T&T Music and videos online

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance