[governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I don't think that I went so far as to say, or consider, the  
Secretariat would take offense, nor do i think I used, or even thought  
of, the word 'allegation'.  In fact I was trying to avoid making any  
statement at all, but rather was trying to ask a question.

I merely asked for a reference regarding the Secretariat's perceptions  
on this.  If someone can point me to such a statement I would be happy  
to take the question to the Secretariat and see if I can get a reading  
on it.  I can also ask a direct question.  But which question would I  
be asking:

a. are organizations such as ICANN, ISOC, IETF, IAB, the RIRs etc  
considered CS?
b. are organizations such as ICANN, ISOC, IETF, IAB, the RIRs etc  
considered International Organizations?
c. were any of the original CS designated members of the Advisory  
Group also representatives of a Internet community entity?

or some other variant?

One thought I would contribute on my own, is that often the decision  
may have been made on the skills and expertise the individual qua  
individual brought to the AG and not the association or associations a  
person may have had at the time.  Also many people have multiple  
associations that evolve over time.   I would think that a person  
would be the representative of a entity such as ICANN, ISOC etc.. if,  
and only if, they were an employee or on the board.  But that is just  
my personal view.

I also don't have the clearest memory of the original selection  
process, but I do remember that many civil society groupings besides  
the IGC sent in lists of recommendations, and if a name showed on the  
list of a CS organization, then the person would probably have been  
considered a CS selection if they were chosen.

a.

On 19 Feb 2008, at 12:35, Guru wrote:

> Hi Avri,
>
> Do you think the IGF secretariat will take offence to this  
> 'allegation' of
> having perceived 'entities .....such as ICANN, RIR and IETF are CS'.  
> I am
> happy to hear that. For it may help to solve a strange riddle that  
> some of
> us are caught in  -  whether ICANN plus is CS! ...  Some IGC members  
> seem to
> believe so... If only the IGF secretariat can issue a disclaimer a  
> major
> problem in the IGC will solved :-)
>
> Regards,
> Guru
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 8:53 PM
> To: Governance Caucus
> Subject: Re: [governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)
>
>
> On 19 Feb 2008, at 08:49, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
>> The problem is > that the Internet administration organizations'
> insistence that they > are CS, or their perception as such by the IGF
> Secretariat, is partly > responsible for reducing the size of the CS  
> element
> on the MAG.
>
> Hi,
>
> Can you point out to me where the IGF secretariat has perceived that
> entities (word chosen to avoid the current discussion of whether  
> they are
> IOs or not) such as ICANN, RIR and IETF are CS?
>
> Thanks
> 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