[governance] charter 1.5

[Parminder]

Thanks Avri, for driving the process long and hard, but hopefully now
towards a closure. 

 

Can I share a few comments on the latest changes.

 

>the most significant

> change was to the mission where i replaced

> 

> It is intended

> with

> The membership of the caucus intends

> 

> I understand this is a slightly different meeting as it attributes

> the intention to the membership as opposed to some abstract entity.

> 

 

Can we just say ' the caucus intends....' because the mention of membership
in this line appears to stand out discordantly. It appears to highlight the
importance of enrolling as members, kind of a exclusive ' only for members'
stance. Whereas we plan to keep the forum wider, more open, and though
developing networks and other connections offer some possibilities for
non-members to participate in some ways - through membership of individuals
representing groups, HR caucus for example, or through other outreach
measures that we pledge to undertake in other parts of the charter..

 

Another thing about the part where the option of secret versus open voting
is stated.

 

At all times when a case for open voting was made on this list, it was
insisted that there can and will be situations where secret voting may be
needed. So can we make the option to read

 

All voting will be open, though on discretion of moderators, with or without
request from member(s), it can be made into a secret vote. The reasons for
making it a secret vote will be stated, and are subject to appeal. 

 

As for making the vote on this charter itself a secret vote, I know that a
decision has to be taken one way or the other by the moderator, and I do not
want to raise dissent here and will agree to go with the decision. However,
this particular vote exemplifies my position on open voting very well. I
cannot find one reason why the vote should be secret in this case, and the
'competing' imperative of transparency of process and 'public-ness' of
opinion and representation (if any) remains strong in this case. 

 

Third thing.

 

The phrase (realization of) 'cultural concerns' in the vision looks a bit
odd, can we think of a replacement that serves the purpose better. that if
any one has some bright idea, I couldn't hit upon one. 

 

Thanks 

 

Parminder 

 

________________________________________________

Parminder Jeet Singh

IT for Change, Bangalore

Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities 

91-80-26654134

www.ITforChange.net 

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at acm.org]

> Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2006 10:23 AM

> To: Governance Caucus

> Subject: [governance] charter 1.5

> 

> Hi,

> 

> As usual the latest copy can be found in:

> 

> http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_draft.html

> aka: http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC_charter_draft-1.5.html

> 

> Older versions can still be found on the web site

> http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC_charter_draft-1.4.html  etc....

> 

> Changes in 1.5

> 

> - removed notes on Vision issue

> - removed vision from the set of options that needed a seperate

> decision (i.e. it seems like we have pretty much settled on having a

> Vision and Mission that closely resembles the text currently in the

> document)

> - add option for secret vs public ballots

> - editorial changes to vision and mission

> - changes made based on Parminder's note on recommended changes to

> the Mission.  i simplified the text somewhat.

> - formatting changes to objectives

> - replaced Internet Goverance with Internet governance (not really

> sure which is correct but figured it should be consistent)

> - removed reference to nominating committee under organizational

> roles. It remains as an option under process.

> - Included the two options, voting or nomcom, for appeal teams selection

> - Added reference to no term limitations for nomcom under the nomcom

> process option - people can be selected as often as the random draw

> slects them (assuming the igc opts for a nomcom process)

> 

> On the editorial changes to vision, i tried to make it read better,

> but hopefully did not change any meanings.  the most significant

> change was to the mission where i replaced

> 

> It is intended

> with

> The membership of the caucus intends

> 

> I understand this is a slightly different meeting as it attributes

> the intention to the membership as opposed to some abstract entity.

> 

> thanks

> a.

> 

> 

> 

> 

> ____________________________________________________________

> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:

>      governance at lists.cpsr.org

> To be removed from the list, send any message to:

>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

> 

> For all list information and functions, see:

>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20060722/5131e3dd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: message-footer.txt
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20060722/5131e3dd/attachment.txt>