[governance] Reconstituting MAG

[Parminder]

> In the present formulation of McTim, we do not say the this fourth group
> are
> stakeholders (Meryem seemed to want it that way, but I am fine with
> calling
> them stakeholders as well, and if remember right, not very sure though,
> Meryem, though with reservations, had ok-ed it)but we do say they need to
> be
> represented.

I remember that one issue that members pointed out was that the term
'international organization' has this problem that all the implicated
organization are not international.

McTim formulation now just says, " organizations having an important role in
the
> > development of Internet-related technical standards and relevant
> > policies..."

So, that problem gets addressed here. I also had suggested the term Internet
organizations instead, but McTim's more descriptive term adapting from TA
language is fine for the present purpose. 

While having a problem with the term 'international' we must also remember
that we ourselves insist in our statement that IGF's main remit is global
issues (yes, CS may prefer global to international)and also that most of
these organizations have some global form of representation which can be
included in the 'international/ global category.

Just a couple of thoughts that occurred to me, reflecting on what were the
main points of difference in that long discussion. I may be wrong though,
and there may have been some other more important points.

Parminder 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 10:01 PM
> To: 'McTim'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] Reconstituting MAG
> 
> 
> 
> McTim
> 
> > Looks like Adam has beaten me to the punch, and I am happy to accept
> > his more eloquent text.
> 
> On the other hand, I am happier to accept yours. :)
> 
> Well, Adam when we are asking MAG to name stakeholder groups of selected
> MAG
> members, why dont we name the fourth stakeholder group as well. And yes, I
> am very clear that they need to have appropriate representation in the
> MAG.
> 
> (So, Suresh, it really is not that I have been trying to offload anyone's
> representation - which you continue to believe. I never asked for it once.
> I
> just want clarity on the nature of the groups.)
> 
> In the present formulation of McTim, we do not say the this fourth group
> are
> stakeholders (Meryem seemed to want it that way, but I am fine with
> calling
> them stakeholders as well, and if remember right, not very sure though,
> Meryem, though with reservations, had ok-ed it)but we do say they need to
> be
> represented.
> 
> Would allay misgivings of this group that CS wants them off MAG or any
> such
> thing. We most definitely don't.
> 
> I do think that the issue in fact is simpler than the long discussion made
> it out to be.
> 
> Parminder
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 6:51 PM
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Parminder
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Reconstituting MAG
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 3:16 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The MAG reconstitution draft stands follow.
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Membership of the MAG
> > >
> > > (text to be decided.) Since the process that built towards Meryem/ Ian
> > > formulation failed,
> >
> > How's this:
> >
> > We reiterate our previously stated dissatisfaction with the limited
> > representation of civil society in the first instance of the Advisory
> > Group, as full civil society representation is necessary to ensure
> > legitimacy for this new experiment in global governance. CS is
> > underrepresented, we (and others) agree, and we want to support the
> > remedying of that anomaly.
> >
> > We also note that 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.
> >
> > --------------------
> >
> > The above has some of Ian's, some of Lee's and some of our previous
> > text intermingled.
> >
> > Doh!
> >
> > Looks like Adam has beaten me to the punch, and I am happy to accept
> > his more eloquent text.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > McTim
> > $ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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