[governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG - Yea

Parminder parminder at itforchange.net
Thu May 10 12:21:52 EDT 2007 

> >Sorry, Mawaki, I just sent out the consensus call before I downloaded
> your
> >email...
> >
> 
> 
> Then you should have downloaded your email before
> sending.  

Adam, you are being un-necessarily harsh on me...

Well, thats how I have set my mail server, It doesn’t download emails
automatically because it interferes in my work. So when I wrote the email
with the consensus call, well after the declared timeline, and after giving
a 2 hour notice, and clicked on send/receive, I got the Mawaki email... So,
that being that, you need not tell me how shd I set my email client...

But the point is - lets say I had seen Mawaki's email before I sent the
consensus call, do you recommend that for a text which has been under
discussion for many days, and many had contributed to it, I change as
important a part of it as a heading because an email arrives minutes before
the doc is sent out for consensus call.... will it be fair to those who
contributed that part, and so many others who agreed to the whole text... Or
do you suggest that I hold back the consensus call because of that email...
Also, pl keep in mind, that Mawaki's contribution was support to the doc
plus an advise with, in my understanding, more of a strategic rather
substantive implication.

> Mawaki's email should be considered.

Your injunction is even more uncalled for, because I did consider Mawaki's
email. In the best way I could. 

And you could easily see that my consideration of mawaki's inputs was
genuine, because I contributed to the discussion on changing the heading by
adding a word to mawaki's suggestion, which any one can understand is an
endorsement of the new heading... So I cant see whats your problem...

> Your consensus call obviously does not represent
> consensus.

Consensus calls don’t represent a consensus, they put a document out for
consensus. And it is left to the co-coordinators to consolidate a document
which in their opinion represents the best chance of a consensus. I have
done that. And I think I have followed a fair process. However, you of
course have recourse to the appeals committee... 


Parminder 
________________________________________________
Parminder Jeet Singh
IT for Change, Bangalore
Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities 
Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
www.ITforChange.net 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2007 12:59 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder
> Subject: RE: [governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG - Yea
> 
> >Sorry, Mawaki, I just sent out the consensus call before I downloaded
> your
> >email...
> >
> 
> 
> Then you should have downloaded your email before
> sending.  Mawaki's email should be considered.
> Your consensus call obviously does not represent
> consensus.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >________________________________________________
> >Parminder Jeet Singh
> >IT for Change, Bangalore
> >Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities
> >Tel: (+91-80) 2665 4134, 2653 6890
> >Fax: (+91-80) 4146 1055
> >www.ITforChange.net
> >
> >>  -----Original Message-----
> >>  From: Mawaki Chango [mailto:ki_chango at yahoo.com]
> >>  Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 10:27 PM
> >>  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >>  Subject: Re: [governance] IGC statement to IGF MAG - Yea
> >>
> >>  I support.
> >>  I'd advise though to remove ICANN from the heading 2, but not
> >>  from the text. Instead of :
> >>
> >>  "(2) ICANN and Core Internet Resources"
> >>  we could have
> >>  "(2) Core Internet Resources and current governance
> >>  institutions"
> >>  or a variant of that.
> >>
> >>  Mawaki
> >>
> >>  --- Carlos Afonso <ca at rits.org.br> wrote:
> >>
> >>  > No kiss of death -- we will protest! We will not just send the
> >>  > proposal
> >>  > and wait... I assume we are engaged in disseminating and
> >>  > lobbying for
> >>  > our positions in our constituencies (and, in some cases, with
> >>  > our
> >>  > governments as well). In any case, we can negotiate a word
> >>  > replacement
> >>  > (meaning the same, of course) later on in the actual debate.
> >>  > We can
> >>  > replace, for example, "ICANN" with "core resources such as the
> >>  >
> >>  > administration/governance of names, numbers and protocols..."
> >>  > :)
> >>  >
> >>  > --c.a.
> >>  >
> >>  > DRAKE William wrote:
> >>  > > Milton Mueller wrote:
> >>  > >
> >>  > >> I fully agree with Carlos, both about delivering it now,
> >>  > and about the
> >>  > >> title. Thanks, Parminder for putting it together.
> >>  > >
> >>  > > Has there been a formal consensus call, and that's what
> >>  > we're responding
> >>  > > to here?  If so what's the time frame?
> >>  > >
> >>  > > I'm a yes on both of the above, although it occurs to me
> >>  > that there was
> >>  > > never any follow up discussion on Adam's argument that
> >>  > framing #2 in
> >>  > > terms of ICANN rather than just core resources would be the
> >>  > kiss of
> >>  > > death mAG-wise.  But as the clock is running down and we
> >>  > have no
> >>  > > alternative language to consider, I guess we'll just see how
> >>  > it goes,
> >>  > > assuming the proposal gets through the IGC process.
> >>  > >
> >>  > > Cheers,
> >>  > >
> >>  > > Bill
> >>  > > ____________________________________________________________
> >>  > > 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
> >>  > >
> >>  > >
> >>  > >
> >>  >
> >>  > --
> >>  >
> >>  > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  > Carlos A. Afonso
> >>  > diretor de planejamento
> >>  > Rede de Informações para o Terceiro Setor - Rits
> >>  > http://www.rits.org.br
> >>  > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  >
> >>  > ____________________________________________________________
> >>  > 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
> >>  >
> >>
> >>  ____________________________________________________________
> >>  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
> >
> >____________________________________________________________
> >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
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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

More information about the Governance mailing list