[governance] coordinator elections
Parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Wed Apr 23 03:04:31 EDT 2008
> If someone has been subscribed to the list for
> two months they should be sent an email asking
> them if they wish to become a member of the
> caucus and if they subscribe to the IGC charter
> (which means they have read the charter
> <http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html >
> and accept the provisions of the charter.) If
> they answer yes, they are members and can be
> added to a member list.
>
Thats exactly what is proposed by me to be done. I mean to send an email to
all those who have been on this list for two months. Almost all those who
joined after that joined in response to my specific invite, and in that the
charter endorsement thing is mentioned. Many have explicitly said they
endorse the charter, and I have that list.
> I expect whoever is the list admin should be able to see a subscription
> date.
Avri has shared such a list with me.
Parminder
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 10:10 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] coordinator elections
> Importance: High
>
> If someone has been subscribed to the list for
> two months they should be sent an email asking
> them if they wish to become a member of the
> caucus and if they subscribe to the IGC charter
> (which means they have read the charter
> <http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html >
> and accept the provisions of the charter.) If
> they answer yes, they are members and can be
> added to a member list.
>
> I expect whoever is the list admin should be able to see a subscription
> date.
>
> They current member list would be whoever was
> given a vote in the last ballot held (appeals
> team?) And anyone subscribed for at least the
> past two months (the charter says "Each person
> who is subscribed to the list at least two (2)
> months before the election will be given a voter
> account.") Suggest that once we agree what
> defines membership/voter pool, then we can say
> the election process has started and take the
> two-months back from that date.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> >I have been requesting the caucus to sort out some organizational issues,
> >and I think this particular issue must be sorted out 'now', to give me
> the
> >right directions to proceed further on the matter of co-coordinator
> >elections.
> >
> >The issue is about a membership list of IG Caucus, for the voting
> process.
> >
> >> if we had so desired we could have changed the charter. we didn't.
> >
> >Avri, There should be no doubt that in driving the election process I
> have
> >no intention other than to go by the charter, as it exists, and my
> personal
> >opinion on this does not count. In fact, I had spoken of sending out
> these
> >emails confirming subscription to the charter a few times, the latest
> many
> >days ago with a 4 days comments period (only Jeremy replied, and said he
> was
> >fine with the process). However I still did not send the emails out
> because
> >I suspected that some members may have different ideas on this (proven
> right
> >from your email) and therefore came back, once again, to the list
> yesterday.
> >
> >
> >I also took as an endorsement of my reading of the charter when on my
> >proposal to send out an email to IGF attendee inviting them to join IGC
> >Milton commented (only comment received) that I should add a line that
> >subscribing to the charter allows one to vote. The full text of the
> email,
> >with the added line, was then again put on IGC before it was sent out.
> >
> > So the only thing relevant here, at this moment of time, is the reading
> of
> >the intention of the charter.
> >
> >As I said I have asked for caucus's opinion on this several times.
> >
> >There are two part of the charter
> >(http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html )relevant to this
> >issue. One is the part on 'membership', and the second on 'voting
> process'.
> >
> >The two read as follows.
> >
> >Membership
> >
> >The members of the IGC are individuals, acting in personal capacity, who
> >subscribe to the charter of the caucus. All members are equal and have
> the
> >same rights and duties.
> >
> >(after a couple of other sections follows the part on voting process)
> >
> >Voting Process
> >
> >Each person who is subscribed to the list at least two (2) months before
> the
> >election will be given a voter account.
> >
> >As part of the voting process the voter must personally ascertain that
> they
> >are a member of the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere
> in
> >this charter and posted as part of the voting information (i.e. a voter
> must
> >affirm membership on the voter form in order to vote). The decision to
> >self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal decision based on the
> >criteria defined. A list of the self-defined member-voters will be
> published
> >after the election with the results of the election.
> >
> >Elections will be run by the coordinators and will be subject to the
> appeals
> >process.
> >
> >(end)
> >
> >In my reading there is probably (though only probably) a small
> incongruity
> >between the two which is at the root of the issue under discussion.
> >
> >The membership part is clear that members are those who ' subscribe to
> the
> >charter of the caucus'. Clearly, those who do NOT subscribe are not
> members.
> >Does anyone have any doubt over this reading?
> >
> >I read the membership section of the charter as being at a higher level
> then
> >the voting section, if a possible issue of apparent incongruity has to be
> >resolved. (pl also comment on this construction.)
> >
> >However, the incongruity may not be real.
> >
> >The 'voting process' part says, all those subscribed to the list on a
> >particular day - 2 months before the election - will be given a voter
> >account. (if it meant membership of IGC wonder why the membership part
> >didn't say that as well, it would have been easy and direct.) I take the
> >major intent of this line to be contained in the part ' subscribed to the
> >list at least two (2) months before the election', to avoid the
> possibility
> >of last minute registrations, and to allow the members some time to know
> the
> >issues etc a bit.
> >
> >Then it says that "voter must personally ascertain that they are a member
> of
> >the IGC based on membership criteria described elsewhere in this
> >charter....." That elsewhere has just one criterion mentioned -
> subscription
> >to the charter'. Therefore I don't see any problem in directly
> ascertaining
> >if one subscribes to the charter, and therefore accepts membership,
> rather
> >than asking 'do you think you are a member as per the criterion mentioned
> >elsewhere in the charter'.
> >
> >That's essentially the difference between the process I have proposed and
> >what, Avri, you propose. I don't see why you are making so much out of
> it,
> >and hyping it with language like you don't want to be swearing an oath.
> >
> >'The decision to self-identify as a member of the IGC is a personal
> decision
> >based on the criteria defined.' This may be the part which makes you
> think
> >that by the very act of voting one is a member, and adherence to the
> charter
> >is assumed. The meaning and intent of this line here is not very clear,
> but
> >I take its meaning more in the context of civil society identity of a
> >member, which is not a stated criterion of membership but a strongly
> implied
> >one (see the mention of 'CS' thrice in the mission statement). We know
> that
> >this can be controversial identity to judge and therefore the charter
> leaves
> >it to every person's self-identification, for the purpose of voting here.
> >
> >In any case if there were at all any real or perceived misalignment
> between
> >the membership part and the 'voting process' part I will take that the
> >'membership' part will hold greater authoritativeness.
> >
> >In any case, while I can see that a class of members can be non voters, I
> >cant see some voters being non-members. That looks quite illogical.
> >Therefore clearly all voters must have endorsed the charter. I am merely
> >asking them, have they considered this issue, and done so. I know many
> IGC
> >list participants may not want to subscribe to the charter identifying us
> an
> >a advocacy group committed to such and such, and I am merely giving them
> a
> >right to do so, and know that in that case, as per the group's charter,
> they
> >shouldn't vote.
> >
> >And this issue, in case of the IGC list, as we all know is a very real
> one.
> >There are many on this list who are here to look up for information, or
> even
> >to participate in a debate, but not as a part of an advocacy group,
> >committed to collective action along certain lines, as constituted by the
> >charter. So, the numbers on the list is much larger than those who would
> >self-identify as charter endorsing members. We know that only a small
> part
> >voted during the charter part (60 or so) and among them we still do not
> know
> >which were the ones (all voters minus 3) who affirmed the charter.
> >
> >And we ourselves often identify this dual nature of IGC - as a discussion
> >forum, and as an advocacy group, and have developed some level of comfort
> >with this dual identity.
> >
> >I think not having a list of full members of the caucus who have endorsed
> >the charter is a very real issue, and we do not have this list at
> present. A
> >few members have publicly asked me for this list, most recently Adam, and
> I
> >have not replied, or replied in some embarrassment describing the current
> >situation.
> >
> >So, I request member's views on this issue of (1) how to prepare the
> voters
> >list for co-coordinator elections, and what process to follow (read the
> >enclosed email for the process proposed by me) and (2) whether we need or
> >don't need a list of members of IGF as defined by the charter.
> >
> >
> >At this point, since we are in the middle of a process, we are only
> seeking
> >these views 'as per the members' reading of the charter' which we need to
> >follow for IGC's organizational processes. Other more general views may
> be
> >offered, but with clear separation from the view 'as per reading of the
> >charter'. Thanks.
> >
> >Parminder
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 11:50 PM
> >> To: Governance Caucus
> >> Subject: Re: [governance] coordinator elections
> >>
> >>
> >> On 22 Apr 2008, at 12:35, Parminder wrote:
> >>
> >> > If anyone has any comments, pl give provide them now. Thanks.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "This is to prepare a voting list for the election of co-
> >> >> coordinator of
> >> >> IGC.
> >> >> The charter of the IGC at
> >> >> http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html lays down
> >> >> that the
> >> >> membership of IG consists of those who have endorsed the IGC
> >> >> charter. If
> >> >> you
> >> >> endorse the IGC charter pleas cut paste the following lines and
> >> >> reply to
> >> >> this email.
> >> >>
> >> >> "I have read the IGC charter at .... and endorse it". With your
> >> >> full name
> >> >> appended to this.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> i still prefer the endorsement of the charter indicated by the act of
> >> voting as described in the charter and don't plan to swear any
> >> separate oaths myself.
> >>
> >> i would see doing so as an explicit expression of not really
> >> supporting the charter since i would be doing something contrary to
> >> what the charter required.
> >>
> >> if we had so desired we could have changed the charter. we didn't.
> >>
> >> 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
> >____________________________________________________________
> >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
> >
> >Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>,
> > "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net>
> >From: "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net>
> >To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>,
> > "'Kleinwächter, Wolfgang'"
> ><wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>,
> > "'Jeanette Hofmann'" <jeanette at wzb.eu>
> >Subject: [governance] coordinator elections
> >Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 14:36:10 +0530
> >Message-ID: <20080415090621.103E0E23FC at smtp3.electricembers.net>
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
> > boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0074_01C8A527.8F437710"
> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
> >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
> >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.4 (2006-07-26) on
> shire.symonds.net
> >X-Spam-Level:
> >X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=6.0
> >tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_HELO_PASS
> >autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.4
> >In-Reply-To:
> ><2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8425C26 at server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> >Thread-Index: AcieVl3pAp6vmxFPRKGxKVCj7NJiSwAAFARgAAGFyXQAHcDI8A==
> >X-Original-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >X-ElectricEmbers-MailScanner-Information: Send
> >questions or false-positive reports to
> >help at electricembers.net
> >X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> >X-Envelope-From: parminder at itforchange.net
> >X-Loop: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >X-Sequence: 3524
> >X-no-archive: yes
> >List-Help: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=help>
> >List-Subscribe:
> <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=subscribe%20governance>
> >List-Unsubscribe:
> ><mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=unsubscribe%20governance>
> >X-Antiabuse: This header was added to track
> >abuse, please include it with any abuse report
> >
> >
> >
> >Wolfgang
> >
> >As a practice we shd and follow the principle that old appointments stay
> >till new ones are in place. There are admin problems, and associated
> >problems of adequate dynamism of the group, which does delay
> appointments.
> >But we are in a formative period and should accept this looseness/
> >flexibility to the extent this in inevitable.
> >
> >So, Vittorio is still a co-coordinator, though I can understand his
> >reluctance of doing much beyond an announced period of end of coordinator
> >ship which thought the charter says should end around June, we find it
> more
> >convenient to end it with the annual IGF (though never formally decided,
> so
> >open to comments).
> >
> >The main problem with voting for new coordinator to replace Vittorio has
> >been (1) non availability of online voting system used the last time,
> which
> >now has been solved (2) the problem, which I have tried to discuss here
> >earlier, of who is qualified as a voter.
> >
> >The IGC charter says membership consists of those who have endorsed the
> >charter. Now, we have a list of those who voted in the charter vote, but
> >still not the names of those 3 who voted against the charter at that
> time.
> >So we really do not have the list of charter endorsees. Those who would
> have
> >joined IGC later may never have considered the option, may not know if
> it,
> >of endorsing the charter.
> >
> >Though in the case of a few scores who joined after I sent out an invite
> >earlier this year, I clearly asked them about charter endorsement, and we
> >have a separate list of those among them who have endorsed the charter.
> But
> >they all in any case are still not eligible to vote.
> >
> >As for the situation with the last elections, I quote my email of 24th
> >March, also enclosed, where I had solicited members views on the voting
> >rights issue.
> >
> >"The ballot for the co-coordinator election of 2006 carried a proviso
> that
> >"by voting you affirm that you consider yourself a Civil Society
> participant
> >of the Internet Governance Caucus""
> >
> >"I am trying to obtain the full list of those who voted in this election.
> >However I still wonder if an affirmation, that too only by implication
> and
> >not as a forthright statement, of being a 'CS participant of IGC' itself
> can
> >mean that one has endorsed the charter. It is likely that someone who
> does
> >enter into discussion on the list, but does not mean to endorse the
> charter
> >can say yes to this proviso and proceed to vote. And not be dishonest or
> >untruthful in doing so."
> >
> >(ends)
> >
> >So, what I now propose for the coordinator elections to send an email to
> all
> >those on the IGC since exactly 2 months from with something like
> >
> >"This is to prepare a voting list for the election of co-coordinator of
> IGC.
> >The charter of the IGC at
> ><http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-
> 061014.html>http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC-charter_final-061014.html
> >lays down that the
> >membership of IG consists of those who have endorsed the IGC charter. If
> you
> >endorse the IGC charter pleas cut paste the following lines and reply to
> >this email.
> >
> >"I have read the IGC charter at .... and endorse it". With your full name
> >appended to this.
> >
> >We will prepare a voting list of all who reply in say 10 days, and a
> ballot
> >will be sent to all of them and they given a week to vote.
> >
> >As you know we have two candidates, David Goldstein and Ian Peter.
> >
> >Please comment within the next 4 days if this process is fine with you.
> Also
> >give your suggestions etc. Avri has offered to help me with this process,
> >and we will commence it sometime next week.
> >
> >Parminder
> >
> >Avri - on your email on appeals committee, we will put one together after
> >this election, but as I said till a new one comes in we still go to the
> old
> >one for all purposes, including coordinator recall, and that it stays
> live.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Kleinwächter, Wolfgang
> >>
> >>[<mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-
> halle.de>mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de]
> >> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:54 PM
> >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder; Jeanette Hofmann;
> >> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> Subject: AW: [governance] rights based approach to the Internet
> >>
> >> BTW, if I remember correctly, we always had to co-chairs: YJ and me,
> >> Jenatte and Adama. And we had Parminder and Vittorio. Did Vittorio
> resign
> > > officially?
> >>
> >> wolfgang
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>
> >> Von: Parminder
> >>[<mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> >> Gesendet: Mo 14.04.2008 19:45
> >> An: 'Jeanette Hofmann'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> Betreff: RE: [governance] rights based approach to the Internet
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Since this list has been extraordinary belligerent from day one,
> >> > wouldn't agree on any other chair either, in fact had problems
> finding
> >> > people volunteering for this job, we should stop this discussion and
> >> > hope that those who are willing to coordinate this huddle don't run
> >> > away. Amen.
> >>
> >> Hi Jeanette
> >>
> >> That's rather ungratifying a reason for keeping me a coordinator :).
> On
> >> the
> >> other hand, I can assure you I am nowhere close to running away.
> Parminder
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Jeanette Hofmann
> [<mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu>mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu]
> >> > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:08 PM
> >> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; McTim
> >> > Cc: Milton L Mueller; Suresh Ramasubramanian
> >> > Subject: Re: [governance] rights based approach to the Internet
> >> >
> >> > Since this list has been extraordinary belligerent from day one,
> >> > wouldn't agree on any other chair either, in fact had problems
> finding
> >> > people volunteering for this job, we should stop this discussion and
> >> > hope that those who are willing to coordinate this huddle don't run
> >> > away. Amen.
> >> >
> >> > McTim wrote:
> >> > > On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Milton L Mueller
> <mueller at syr.edu>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > >> > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian
> >>[<mailto:suresh at hserus.net>mailto:suresh at hserus.net]
> >> > >> > disrespect to his CS credentials, or his excellent work in IT
> For
> >> > >> Change,
> >> > >> > he recuse himself from his role as coordinator, and
> coordination
> >> be
> >> > >> taken
> >> > >> > over by Bill Drake, Adam, Meryem, Jeanette Hoffman or some
> others
> >> on
> >> > >> the
> >> > >> > list.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> I'm not sure whether this was a serious suggestion, but if so it
> is
> >> > >> highly inappropriate for you to try to leverage minor quibbles
> over
> >> a
> >> > >> workshop into a coup. Parminder is our elected coordinator and
> shall
> >> > >> remain so until we have another election.
> >> > >
> >> > > Or a recall (according to the charter).
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > ____________________________________________________________
> >> > 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>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>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>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>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/
> info/governance
> >
> >
> >Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>,
> > "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net>
> >From: "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net>
> >To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>,
> > "'Adam Peake'" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
> >Subject: RE: [governance] NOMCOM - MAG nominations
> >Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:35:15 +0530
> >Message-ID: <20080324110530.296D5E0451 at smtp3.electricembers.net>
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> > boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0070_01C8A527.8F437710"
> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510
> >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
> >X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.4 (2006-07-26) on
> shire.symonds.net
> >X-Spam-Level:
> >X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=6.0
> >tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FORGED_RCVD_HELO,SPF_HELO_PASS
> >autolearn=ham version=3.1.4
> >In-Reply-To: <p06240800c40a4695b03d@[192.168.1.4]>
> >Thread-Index: AciMtllJ1GJb9JsTSvqmhKfARkynNAA5dmOQ
> >X-Original-To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >X-ElectricEmbers-MailScanner-Information: Send
> >questions or false-positive reports to
> >help at electricembers.net
> >X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
> >X-Envelope-From: parminder at itforchange.net
> >X-Loop: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >X-Sequence: 3240
> >X-no-archive: yes
> >List-Help: <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=help>
> >List-Subscribe:
> <mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=subscribe%20governance>
> >List-Unsubscribe:
> ><mailto:sympa at lists.cpsr.org?subject=unsubscribe%20governance>
> >X-Antiabuse: This header was added to track
> >abuse, please include it with any abuse report
> >
> >
> >
> > > Do we have a list of people who signed the charter?
> >>
> >> Adam
> >
> >In fact, this is an issue which has been bothering me a bit, and is
> partly
> >responsible for the delay in co-coordinator elections. I want the group's
> >advice on this.
> >
> >The charter clearly defines the membership of the IGC as constituting
> those
> >who have endorsed its charter.
> >
> >We have a list of 58 people who voted during the charter vote. But among
> >these, 3 voted against. So, we do not have a list of those who voted for
> >
> >The ballot for the co-coordinator election of 2006 carried a proviso that
> >"by voting you affirm that you consider yourself a Civil Society
> participant
> >of the Internet Governance Caucus"
> >
> >I am trying to obtain the full list of those who voted in this election.
> >However I still wonder if an affirmation, that too only by implication
> and
> >not as a forthright statement, of being a 'CS participant of IGC' itself
> can
> >mean that one has endorsed the charter. It is likely that someone who
> does
> >enter into discussion on the list, but does not mean to endorse the
> charter
> >can say yes to this proviso and proceed to vote. And not be dishonest or
> >untruthful in doing so.
> >
> >I would much prefer a prior endorsement of the charter, rather than an
> act
> >which is a (secondary) part of voting. But that is only my personal view.
> I
> >think endorsement of the charter should be a clear and positive step in
> >enrolling as a full member of the IGC.
> >
> >To All CS Rio attendees whom I wrote an email inviting them to join the
> IGC
> >(and many have) I clearly asked whether they also endorse the charter,
> and
> >many have. This is the only clear list of charter endorsees that I have.
> >
> >Members' views are solicited on this. Thanks.
> >
> >Parminder
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Adam Peake [<mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp>mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> >> Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 12:49 PM
> >> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> >> Subject: RE: [governance] NOMCOM - MAG nominations
> >>
> >> I volunteer if there are no objections.
> >>
> >> A member of the MAG commenting on other
> >> "incumbent" members might either be helpful or
> >> might be an undue/unfair influence. Not sure
> >> which. But worth discussing.
> >>
> >> I understand that if selected I wouldn't be
> >> eligible for the list being chosen. But should
> >> that happen I would not withdraw my name from
> >> consideration by the SG as either through
> >> self-nomination or if recommended by some CS
> >> group. I hope members of the appeals teams would
> >> also not be subject to any restriction.
> >>
> >> Do we have a list of people who signed the charter?
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >Hi All
> >> >
> >> >We are at number 18, and still need at least 7 more volunteers.
> >> >
> >> >Please also give your views on what should we do if we don¹t reach
> 25.
> >> >
> >> >(1) Should we draw 5 members in any case
> >> >from the pool available, say, by the end of
> >> >Monday?
> >> >(2) Should we go for direct elections of MAG
> > > >nominees (we have a voting software now, which
> >> >has graciously been offered by Bigpulse, whose
> >> >software I understand is being used by many
> >> >other IG orgs. And groups)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Parminder
> >> >
> >> >The present list of volunteers is as follows.
> >> >
> >> >Milton Mueller
> >> >Jeremy Malcolm
> >> >Suresh Ramasubramanian
> >> >Jeremy Shtern
> >> >Robert Guerra
> >> >Bret Faucett
> >> >SCHOMBE Baudouin
> >> >Carlos Afonso
> >> >Ian Peter
> >> >Lee W. McKnight
> >> >Maja Anjelkovic
> >> >Gurumurthy K
> >> >Rudi Vansnick
> >> >Karen Banks
> >> >Michael Gurstein
> >> >David Goldstein
> >> >Philippe Dam
> >> >Anita Gurumuthy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >____________________________________________________________
> >> >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>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>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>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