[governance] Re: Nomcom and conflict of interest

[McTim]

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
>> >> 1. He/She needs to have CS cred
>> >
>> >This suggests that 'CS credentials' should be used as a key and 'the'
>>
>> This suggests that CS cred should be used as a key, yes.
>
> Thanks for reasserting. But that's not the operating part of what I said,
> which, to quote again, was...
>
> "This suggests that 'CS credentials' should be used as a key and 'the'
> central criterion, which will require a clear explanation what the proposer
> of this criterion really means by it."

Well, since we are nominating folk outside the IGC to the MAG, don't
they need some kind of CS "cred"" or background or history in order
for the NomCom to put their names forward?

Take for example, the 2 RIR leaders (both on this list) who have been
nominated by CS in the last few years.  IIRC, PW worked with APC as a
Board member as well as a participant in SANOG, WSIS and of course, to
cement his CS credentials, he is DG of APNIC and currently chairs the
Exec Committee of the NRO.  Raul, of course as the CEO of LACNIC, has
similar CS credentials (otherwise, why would the LAC CS folk nominate
him)?

>
> Did you read the part on requirement of some 'clear explanation' for it to
> be  a meaningful criterion?
>

One hopes the above makes it clear.  In any case, as SR suggests, this
is a distraction from the main issue.

> So, if you prefer that no 'structural distinction' be used to have some
> level of 'working clarity' for whom we include as CS, and you prefer the
> qualification of 'CS cred', I am obviously curious to know what you consider
> as 'CS creds'...

I certainly prefer to follow the charter, which says that we all have
equal rights and duties.  It follows that any member has the right to
be nominated tot he MAG (unless they are on appeals team or NomCom).
Now, the NomCom has changed this, and excluded a class of folk. This
is not kosher unless we change the charter.

>
>
> I repeat this point because almost all others who have had some reservation
> on making any structural distinction at all in identifying CS, and CS
> persons, that is suggested in IGC's WSIS history, in its charter, in
> majority of discussions on the list, in our Feb statement, and in nomcom's
> decision, have now spoken of some kind of criterion of 'CS credentials' or
> 'CS viewpoints'
>

Where in the charter does it suggest a "structural distinction"? In
the Feb statement, I read it as  saying "we want them and us" as a
middle ground because the folk on this list who can't allow a 4th SH
group ALSO can't seem to accept folk who work for, say, non-profits
registries and research bodies as CS.


> I think they owe it to this discussion to clarify what they mean by this
> criterion, what could be 'CS credentials' and 'CS viewpoints', and how they
> can be applied in taking orgs and persons to be civil society or not.

What is owed to this discussion is IMO, less politics and more
"generosity of spirit" to quote Nitin Desai.   To exclude an undefined
class of CS organisations because they have the very same "potential
conflict of interest" that most on this list have, is most ungenerous.

Oh, and Rui, you replied to Parminder when you addressed SR, I never
tire of his posts, as they are usually quite reasonable and have
content that is on point.  I'm afraid I can't say the same about yours
today.  Can you speak to the point about excluding folks a priori
please? I'd like to hear your opinion.  What if we excluded
journalists because they are supposed to be objective (in the sense of
not espousing a position on topics they write about)? Would you be
happy with that?

-- 
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