[governance] coordinating the IGC

[Mawaki Chango]

You're welcome. I hear you, however my support was not just personal, but also to
the transition process. I clearly supported the idea of staggered terms (others also
did, or just asked questions); and in my very mistake earlier, thinking that the
first [sic] coordinator would be (s)elected early next year etc., there was my
support to the transition formula you put forward. As far as I read (and unless
there are parallel exchanges), the idea of picking two co-coordinators right away
has been suggested by one person... out of how many? or is this because of the
consensus you've asked for? 

Anyway, I'll leave the place to others to speak. Whatever the IGC decides, I wish us
wisdom and good luck!

Mawaki

--- Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> Thanks for your note.
> 
> On 22 apr 2006, at 14.59, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> >
> > --- Avri Doria <avri at psg.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> But I accept that other participants have a different viewpoint.  As
> >> several have indicated already there is a preference for picking 2  
> >> co-
> >> coordinators and moving forward as we have in the past,  I take that
> >> to mean that there is not consensus on the suggestion I offered and
> >> that there is not a strong feeling that we need to reorganize before
> >> we can move ahead.
> >
> > I've been reading the emails since your offer, and I haven't seen  
> > any message that
> > expresses anything but a support. Like you, I understand that David  
> > is suggesting
> > something else, which I sincerely don't know what it is, but I do  
> > know that all the
> > others, including myself, have expressed support thus far. The only  
> > thing that
> > remains is, as you said (and I beleive that's what Jeannette was  
> > also trying to
> > address), the IGC needs to have a conversation about some processes  
> > and their
> > implementation.
> >
> 
> Yes I understand that I am personally getting support and I very much  
> appreciate that.
> 
> What concerns me is whether there is support for going into a period  
> of transition that allows the IGC to step back and consider how it  
> moves on.  I think that I am volunteering to facilitate that  
> transition period.  And in suggesting that the co-coordinator  be  
> picked as soon as we decide on our charter and method of working I am  
> suggesting that this new person will be chosen (by some means yet to  
> be agreed on) according to the needs of  decisions yet to be made.  I  
> am afraid that if we pick 2 co-coordinators this month we will make  
> it more difficult to make a transition to a new organizational model.
> 
> But I am accepting that I may be wrong and the IGC may not need to  
> transition to a new model.  And if i am wrong about this, then I am  
> obviously not the right person be a co-coordinator.
> 
> So, this is why I think we need to understand what the consensus of  
> the IGC is.
> 
> 
> thanks
> a.
> 

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