[governance] oversight

[Jeanette Hofmann]

>>What if we take the key points of the Argentinian proposal 
> 
> 
> I would avoid adopting or making reference to any governmental proposal, 
> even if just as a starting point. If you start from the Argentinian 
> proposal, you join the "pro-USG anti-EU" front, and if you start from 
> the EU proposal, it's the opposite.

Why would it not be possible to escape that logic?
> 
> 
>>and adjust them
>>along the lines Adam began and ask a drafting group from the IG caucus to
>>prepare a draft that expands on each point, drawing on the discussion so
>>far as well as the civil society submissions to Prep-Com 3. This can then
>>be brought back  for further comment, before finalising it. The final
>>draft should be released to the media in the week before Prep-Com 3
>>resumes. The draft should use the format of Chapter 3 and be crafted for
>>insertion into the chapter. I propose Avri and Adam act as the drafting
>>group.
> 
> 
> I disagree. This is the most important and most contentious issue on our 
> table: I don't see any subgroup being able to work on it satisfactorily. 

As Avri pointed out, a group of the size of the active caucus members 
definitely won't produce any satisfactory results. We need people who 
take over responsibility and produce a draft very soon. If you donÄt 
like Willi's proposal because you are not part of the club, why don't 
you join it?

> I think that all drafting should happen on this list 

Vittorio, this is impossible.

and we should adopt
> a rough consensus rule, i.e. documents cannot be released unless all 
> objections have been considered and possibly accommodated.

I disagree with this suggestion because there will always be somebody 
who objects. What we want I think is rough consensus. We have had this 
debate before IIRC.

jeanette
> 
> I respect Avri's and Adam's point of view on oversight, and even share 
> it in part, but it is significantly different to other points of view 
> that have been exposed in the past weeks, for example Milton's, or 
> Stephane's, or Patrick's. I would like to be sure that all these points 
> of view are duly reflected in any consensus document.
> 
>  > B.INTERNET GOVERNANCE FORUM
> 
> Incidentally, you might have noticed that we have already been working 
> on text for the part of section 5 regarding the forum. I'm still waiting 
> for someone to explain whether we can use that text, or what's wrong 
> with it.
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance