[governance] Innovation

[William Drake]

Hi Alex,

>> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2007 22:40:14 -0500
>> From: Lee McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu>

>> Whether it might some day be replaced/transform into something else is
>> unknowable at present, but maybe both Meryem and Alejandro and the rest of us
>> can agree that whatever the model, whether of ALAC, ICANN more broadly, or
>> Internet governance still more broadly, that fair, open, and transparent
>> administrative procedures should be developed, and followed, whatever that
>> might mean in a particular issue area? No small task in and of itself, and
>> sure IETF, ICANN, and any number of other entities can be looked to for
>> practical guiidance on what this might might mean for Internet governance.


On 11/28/07 5:46 AM, "Alejandro Pisanty" <apisan at servidor.unam.mx> wrote:

> Lee,
> 
> too either/or to work and still prejudiced.
 
Could you explain how asking that fair, open, and transparent procedures be
followed in IG (per Lee, generally, across issue-areas and institutional
arrangements) is unduly binary and prejudiced?  My recollection from the
WGIG discussion about application of the WSIS principles is that you found
such criteria to be quite useful in evaluating the ITU, so why they be
prejudiced if applied to other arrangements?

Perplexed in the peanut gallery,

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