[governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)

[Meryem Marzouki]

Le 20 févr. 08 à 16:52, Suresh Ramasubramanian a écrit :

> Hit send too soon, very early in the morning in SFO

As someone who needs at least one liter of coffee to open my eyes,  
I'm full of indulgence:)

> On the other hand, I'm quibbling here. Ian's wording below is much  
> more
> preferable to previous variants I have seen. I withdraw my objection.

Thanks for this clarification!

Best,
Meryem

> 	suresh
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:marzouki at ras.eu.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 7:40 AM
>> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Reconstituting MAG (Tech/admin language)
>>
>>
>> Le 20 févr. 08 à 15:24, Suresh Ramasubramanian a écrit :
>>
>>>> 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?
>>
>> No, Suresh. It's not OK. You're supposed to understand English better
>> than I do, but let me explain to you what's wrong with this:
>>
>> Ian's sentence ("However, their representation should not be at the
>> expense of broader civil society participation") was agreed as a
>> replacement to previous sentence ("However, their current over-
>> representation should be corrected"). Both sentences were proposed at
>> the end of the following paragraph: "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. <last sentence>."
>>
>> Even with limited English language skills, anyone would understand
>> that "their" refers to the " International organizations having an
>> important role in the development of Internet-related technical
>> standards and relevant policies", in other words, the so-called
>> "technical community". So we're talking about them in this paragraph,
>> sot talking about CS participation.
>>
>> So why trying to entirely change the sense and the coherence of the
>> whole paragraph, with a replacement proposal that is, on top of all
>> this, nothing but a weaker repetition of the first two paragraphs of
>> the statement? Are we kidding here?
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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