[governance] Deadlines: Comments then some suggestions

[Lee McKnight]

Hi,

A few points on general IG issues & strategy, then suggestions on how a) IGC co-ordinators b) a nomcom c) CS IGF-AG members d) IGF I + beyond can unfold. Here we go:

I agree with Wolfgang that there is a need to get organized; and also that we need organizers to get organized.

I also agree with Avri that the IETF model is both practically and politically perfect as an explicit reference and template for IGF processes, though as has been noted it's a bit trickier running policy than code.  

(Note how I've jumped straight from IGF-MAG to IGF, since I think we should look at the IGF-MAG as the start of IGF I, from an iterative international IG self-organizng perspective. OK there is that SG picking winners & losers among nominees to IGF-MAG, but never mind the theory holds.) 

Here's what I see: 40 people in IGF -MAG +  x# on IG-related discussion lists *> X'00s at 'IGF I: the plenary' *> X'000s on IGF discussion groups *> IGF II etc.   So if we're dealing with the whole wide world it's not surprising there's a bunch of people and yeah governments involved from the start, and yes that is cumbersome.

More important right now for CS is getting some discussion and then some attention to key themes from a CS perspective, offering concrete suggestions on how clear & transparent procedures can work, etc.  

I therefore also strongly agree with Milton & Bill that enhanced cooperation is a worthy topic and critical theme for IGF. In fact it is The main theme.  

Now my suggestions: 

1st re IGC co-cordinators, I think I've read on the list that Robert Guerra and Vittorio volunteer for this, a while back Milton and I nominated & seconded Bill who remained silent, are there any other contenders?  Avri?  If others on the list are interested I suggest you speak up now or hold your peace and volunteer in a year, after we burn out the next pair.  I further propose if other nominess come forward then Avri design an instant process we can follow to get a pair in place. If no other nominees come forward then I ask the 3 nominees to permit themselves to remain nominated so we at least in our internal organization are running a competitive process. And Avri figures out what to do to select a pair fast, since we need them to do some work. So, by end of March new co-ordinators are in place - or at least we know the process & schedule.  If there's only 3 to pick from, all of course most worthy, then a randomized process is perfect : )
 
2nd, with the push for the IGF-AG nominees & list from IGC, we keep in the self-organizing spirit and again have Avri do the work to flesh out further the process for the nomcom; 5 sounds more workable than 10 given the schedule.  The lucky winners of the IGC lottery help get the the 5 nomcom members in place this week, and have a week to do their 1st thing - is that the schedule?  

So in say 30 days or so the IGC could have its co-ordinators, nominees, etc.

3rd, in the meantime, others follow Milton's and Parminder's lead and draft clear proposals on a theme, going beyond the name to the issues and institutions/actors involved.  If some of those institutions have already been contacted and agreed to participate, all the better.   Then others will think they can;t afford to miss the event since we'll all be talking about them anyway.  

In sum: the time seems ripe for IGC to have a substantial impact on IGF, and more generally on clear and transparent procedures for Internet governance.   If the diversity of opinion makes the jobs of the co-ordinators challenging, the fact that we can't manage to organize a democratic process for institutionalizing IGC is actually a good sign. Remember the IETF analogy - it had no formal/legal structure for the longest time, and all in all it in fact helped prevent capture since there was just this amorphous group of volunteers that could not easily be controlled, or directed...gee definitely feels like deja vu - again : )

Anyway, note I have left blank the part on how we get this all started.  Because I am hoping this email gets it started, and you all take it from here.

Lee 



Prof. Lee W. McKnight
School of Information Studies
Syracuse University
+1-315-443-6891office
+1-315-278-4392 mobile

>>> Robert Guerra <rguerra at lists.privaterra.org> 3/17/2006 12:20 PM >>>
Wolfgang Kleinwächter wrote:
> What we need is first of all two new coordinators/facilitators who organize and structure the discussion, push the debate foreward and can function as the link to other constituencies and groups .  
>  
> Where are the volunteers? Or where are the proposals?
>  

Like Vittorio, am interested as well. I am specifically interested in
serving as a link, and liason with other constituencies.


Regards,

Robert


-- 
Robert Guerra <rguerra at privaterra.org>
Managing Director, Privaterra
Tel +1 416 893 0377 Fax +1 416 893 0374


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

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