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

[Jeanette Hofmann]

I am sort of in between Bertrand's and Karl's position. Of course, it 
would be good to define the magic formula for the composition of 
multi-stakeholder structures in a way that questions such as balance and 
fairness of representation are once and forever settled. And what 
Bertrand describes sounds like a good model although I don't quite 
understand the arithmetic. (If all UN organizations have access to UN 
meetings and we add other couple of organizations such as ICANN, IETF 
etc, we end up with a clear dominance of international organizations.) 
At the same time, Bertrand's model looks like snapshot in time whose 
time to live might be less than a year or two.

We don't know how long the caucus can credibly claim to represent civil 
society organizations and individuals in this field. Certainly there are 
  NGOs involved in the ICT area that have never even heard of the IGC. 
And we all have seen people abandoning mailing lists and favor of other 
ones. In this sense I share Karl's concern that we could ossify a 
composition of clans or stakeholder groups that made sense only for a 
short while.
jeanette

Karl Auerbach schrieb:
> 
> I tend to feel rather uncomfortable with your formulation because it 
> doesn't seem to include people.
> 
> For example, your formulation excludes me.
> 
> As you know, I do not believe that any aggregation - whether we call it 
> a corporation, a government, a "stakeholder", an NGO, or "civil society" 
> - ought not to have automatic recognition as being anything more than a 
> convenient means for people to aggregate their individual opinions and 
> views.
> 
> It is always useful to hear the opinions expressed via these aggregates. 
>  And it is true that many, perhaps most, people will chose (usually 
> through inaction) to let some aggregate express an opinion on their behalf.
> 
> But when it comes down making choices and measuring "consensus" (or some 
> other more concrete measure), in other words when it comes to counting 
> noses, we ought to count real noses on real people and not some 
> hypothetical and arbitrary notion that these aggregations actually speak 
> with authority.
> 
> I see further risk in that this kind of creation of a "multi-stakeholder 
> system" will ossify very quickly into a kind of internet caste system.
> 
> Do we really want the governance of the internet to resemble a medieval 
> feudal society in which people have rank and authority based on what 
> groups they are in?
> 
>         --karl--
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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