[governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

> However, their
> representation should not be at the expense of broader civil society
> participation.

However, it is essential to ensure broader and more inclusive civil society
participation

That wording ok?

	suresh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 6:20 AM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Adam Peake'; 'William Drake'
> Subject: RE: [governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)
> 
> 
> > I agree with Bill.
> >
> > I think we should simply be arguing CS has been under-represented for
> > the past two years and we wish to see a fair rebalancing as new
> > members of the MAG rotate in.
> >
> > Adam
> 
> I thought there was some agreement on Ian's formulation, after McTim
> and Lee
> agreed to it.
> 
> I am still not able to understand if your and Bill's problem is that
> the
> formulations as developed earlier(finally, Ian's) was unlikely to get
> rough
> consensus, or you are expressly against mentioning the fourth
> stakeholder.
> (Ian already removed references to its over-representation, something
> which
> you, Adam, mentioned in the first place).
> 
> I wonder why we may think this is not the time to mention this when it
> is
> being discussed in MAG, as per its list transcripts. When MAG is
> discussing
> it why are we not ready to considerer the matter at all. And when the
> presented occasion is about speaking about MAG, its categories, levels
> of
> representation, legitimacies etc.
> 
> 
> Anyway, I am putting below the formulation as it stood after Ian's
> amendments, bec some may have missed parts of it.
> 
> 
> (starts)
> The rules for membership of the MAG, including in terms of
> representation of
> different stakeholders, should be clearly established, and made open
> along
> with due justifications. Full civil society representation is necessary
> to
> ensure legitimacy for this new experiment in global governance.
> 
> . There are seven civil society members at present in a MAG of 40, an
> anomaly which should be corrected in this round of rotation of members.
> We think that as per Tunis Agenda's multi-stakeholder approach,
> membership
> should (ideally) be divided equally among governments, civil society
> and the
> business sector.
> 
> . We also agree that International organizations having an important
> role in
> the development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant
> policies should continue to be represented in the MAG. However, their
> representation should not be at the expense of broader civil society
> participation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp at glocom.ac.jp]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 5:28 PM
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; William Drake
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)
> >
> > I agree with Bill.
> >
> > I think we should simply be arguing CS has been under-represented for
> > the past two years and we wish to see a fair rebalancing as new
> > members of the MAG rotate in.
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> > >Milton,
> > >
> > >FWIW I've always heard them referred to in IGF as TC, and of course
> it
> > does
> > >reduce the number of seats for CS, as do other asymmetries.  It
> would
> > >certainly be appropriate for a statement to say that there's a very
> > >significant imbalance in stakeholder group representation in the
> current
> > mAG
> > >with CS being conspicuously underrepresented relative to others, and
> that
> > >this should be corrected in the refresh.  Saying that gets across
> our
> > >immediate concern clearly without having to get into questioning who
> > besides
> > >CS gets to be at the table in precisely what numbers and what they
> should
> > be
> > >called.
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >
> > >BD
> > >
> > >
> > >On 2/20/08 11:10 AM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>  -----Original Message-----
> > >>>  From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com]
> > >>>
> > >>>  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?
> > >>
> > >>  Formal statements? Of course not, Secretariat bureaucrats are too
> > >>  careful for that. So I answer your question with another one: If
> the
> > >>  9-10 I* organizations are not counted as CS, what are they
> counted as?
> > >>  And where is it stated anywhere what they are counted as? And if
> they
> > >>  are considered a separate "technical community" then by
> definition
> > >>  giving them that status as a stakeholder group on a par with CS
> > reduces
> > >>  the number of CS people on the MAG, does it not?
> > >
> > >
> > >____________________________________________________________
> > >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
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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