[governance] bureau yes bureau no???

William Drake drake at hei.unige.ch
Wed May 23 10:29:25 EDT 2007


Hi Carlos,

More coordination, sure.

Perhaps some talking past each other here.  Yes, in the morning meeting, we
said "the caucus has no position" on the renewed bureau suggestions.
However, it is also true that the caucus has previously affirmed support for
the mAG approach as opposed to a bureau---and make no mistake, they are
understood by all as opposites (but of course we have also criticized the
way the mAG concept has been implemented).  I think Adam was reacting to
Parminder's particular framing that the caucus has no position "because
we've not talked about it" (forget his precise words, but not true) and was
restating the prior position which, absent any revision since, does stand
now.

Best,

Bill


On 5/23/07 4:10 PM, "carlos a. afonso" <ca at rits.org.br> wrote:

> This just happened in the IGF consultation here in Geneva:
> 
> Parminder stated that the CS caucus has no position regarding the
> formation of a bureau, as this needs more debate within the caucus for a
> consensus (or at least rought consensus) to be made -- this is the view
> we got from our caucus morning meeting today. On the other hand, Adam,
> who was not at the morning meeting, said that the caucus has absolutely
> rejected any bureau proposal, which in my view is not true.
> 
> What is this? We need, at a minimum, a bit more coordination...
> 
> --c.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



More information about the Governance mailing list