[governance] Reforming MAG

[Milton L Mueller]

Some good points, Bill Drake, responses below


________________________________

	> We are concerned at the over-representation of governments  
	> in the MAG, and under-representation of civil society. We
think this 
	> should be corrected at the time of the present rotation. For
this  
	
	Full stop.  Not sure how that binary would scan in Beijing,
Moscow, Brasilia, Cairo, Buenos Aires, Riyadh, etc. but I suspect not so
well.  
	 
	Agreed, but this is a wording problem. That's why I think the
argument should hinge less on how many of each group there are, but on a
general case for reducing the size of the MAG. So we could say, "make
the MAG 20 people with the following proportions." no need to single out
any group as having "too many," 
	 
	I don't see why 40 is inherently inefficient and unaccountable
if it's the right 40 and there are clear procedures and everyone shows
up, in all senses.  WGIG was 40 and it worked fine, and the government
participants participated, at least in the F2F, and some did online too.

	 
	But WGIG was not in the same position as MAG. MAG is supposed to
"represent" the broader community and engage in continual interface with
it; WGIG was a stand-alone body that was charged to produce a document
on its own. WGIG was a one-shot creation; Mag is supposed to rotate and
be continuous. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080212/8aa58266/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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