[governance] Reconstituting MAG

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

It wont - in fact it will never happen.  Given that this particular group of
people considers various internet technical bodies "not CS", doesn't like
the liberal ideology of quite a few people participating in such bodies ..
and even Jeremy seems to have a lot of misconceptions about the level of
"governance"  the IETF, for example, can exercise.

So, question: Has all the discussion on this multiple hundred post thread
been, ultimately, useless, and aimed at proposing something that's going to
fall flat?

	srs

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carlos Afonso [mailto:ca at rits.org.br]
> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 6:25 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Milton L Mueller
> Subject: Re: [governance] Reconstituting MAG
> 
> I am one of the ones who said I feel it won't happen, but added that if
> there is any reduction, it will not be on the governments' side. This
> is
> UN, an intergovernmental body. They would prefer to enlarge it to
> accommodate our plea of more representation (if we had the leverage...)
> rather than think of a reduction.
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> Milton L Mueller wrote:
> > I do support calling for reduction in the number. I do not recall any
> > real "opposition" to it, just people who think that it won't happen.
> We
> > certainly cannot claim that there is consensus on the number 40,
> since
> > the preponderance of opinion as far as I can see is against that
> large a
> > number.
> >
> >
> >
> > I also support those who warned you against getting involved in
> specific
> > numbers games and proportional quotas. It is enough to say that CS is
> > underrepresented.
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> >
> >
> >
> > Milton, Meryem, McKnight and others who have reservation on the
> number
> > 40 - do you want the sentence 'We think that 40 is a good number for
> MAG
> > members' struck off. I  am unable to specifically call for reducing
> the
> > number since there seems to be considerable opposition to this.
> >
> >
> >
> > Some members seemed in favor of putting some mathematics in the
> > statement to make a clear case for increased number for CS.  For this
> > reason I do have to go by the present number 40, in this part of the
> > statement. Meryem, you wanted me not to quote the number that can be
> > reserved for the International Internet orgs reps - but I have gone
> by
> > the number 6 which a few of us quoted, because that allows me to
> > complete the calculations for the asked for CS numbers. In any case
> this
> > number is clearly against a total of 40, so there can be no confusion
> > about how this number may be interpreted.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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