[governance] Muti-stakeholder Group structure (some ideas)

[Milton Mueller]

Yes, I think we agree on this, and this has always been Karl Auerbach's
position. It is basically the IETF model, with the important differences
that there are much stronger incentives to cooperate on standards than
on policy tradeoffs involving distributional issues, and that the
stakeholders are much more diverse and the parameters of discussion much
broader. 

The other main issue is: what are the incentives of certain actors,
let's say govts especially, to take off their govt hat and become a
"mere individual"? If George Bush showed up at an IGF in his cowboy
boots and jeans could he anyway avoid the trappings of official state
sponsorship?

>>> Michael Leibrandt <michael_leibrandt at web.de> 6/1/2007 10:02:00 AM
>>>
So we no longer have three distinct stakeholder groups - or "categories
of actors", as Bertrand better describes it. The logical result is that
in all non-negotiating fora, were there are no legal issues around
accountability, liability etc, we're back to individuals. Instead of
counting heads we should open up our minds and start
nominating/supporting capable people even if they formally belong to
what in the old days might have been seen as the "wrong" constituency.  
    

Michael, Berlin


***this is a private internet users statement and must not be mistaken
as a statement from any public or commercial entity ***
_______________________________________________________________
SMS schreiben mit WEB.DE FreeMail - einfach, schnell und
kostenguenstig. Jetzt gleich testen! http://f.web.de/?mc=021192 

____________________________________________________________
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