[governance] Re: Nomcom and conflict of interest

[George Sadowsky]

Milton,

When you say below, "Who represents us on the MAG," I have to point 
out that all MAG members serve in their individual capacity and do 
not represent any external group.  That point has been made 
repeatedly by Nitin Desai and Markus Kummer.

I suspect that you are aware of this and that the phrasing below was 
just not well thought out.  But others may not, and it's a crucial 
distinction to be remembered.  The group is not selecting its 
representatives; rather it is selecting those people in whom they 
have confidence will distinguish themselves if selected as effective 
MAG members in the public interest, according to the rules of the MAG.

I know that it must be frustrating not to be able to draw your own 
conclusions from direct observation, but it is my opinion that the 
majority of MAG members, when speaking in MAG meetings, do try to 
represent a general and public interest, admittedly each through 
their individual lenses, rather than being explicitly channeled by 
narrower interests dictated by their background or the organization 
from which they come.

George

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

At 12:53 PM -0400 6/2/08, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8C4D1.26A98532"
>
>
>
>
>From: Robert Guerra [mailto:lists at privaterra.info]
>
>2. In my view - RIRs should be included as a full member in our IGC 
>discussions.
>
>Robert,
>I think you have missed the target in this increasingly tiresome 
>discussion. No one - not me, not Parminder, not anyone else - has 
>ever proposed to exclude RIR representatives from our discussions. 
>Indeed, I have urged people here to get involved in RIR policy 
>discussion lists, and vice-versa. No one disputes that RIRs play an 
>important role in global IG, either. As has been said repeatedly, 
>the real issue is: who represents us on the MAG - "us" being the IGC 
>- when we discuss RIR policy in the context of the IGF? Do you want 
>an RIR staff person or an independent voice? Same goes for ICANN, 
>ITU, WIPO, etc. Is there not a problem if our "representative" in 
>discussions of ICANN is someone who works for ICANN? No one has ever 
>said that ICANN or an RIR should not be able to participate in the 
>broader discussions of their role in global internet governance. The 
>issue is who represents _us_ in that discussion.  
>As I said earlier,
>RIR's membership is predominantly, though not exclusively, composed 
>of commercial hosting companies and ISPs -- the most common 
>consumers of IP address blocks. But there are also govt agencies and 
>CS groups. RIRs are better thought of as multi-stakeholder 
>regulatory organizations, not as CS, business or govt. Within the 
>framework of IGF and the Tunis Agenda, they fit squarely in the 
>category of "international organizations" along with ICANN. So of 
>course RIRs and ICANN, like other international governance 
>organizations such as OECD or ITU, will be and absolutely should be 
>represented in the MAG and in panels, etc. -- as IOs.
>As governance entities RIRs are accountable to _their own members_ 
>not to us (IGC). As governors, RIR leaders should be accountable to 
>and listen to what the different sectors of society have to say 
>about IG policy. They are welcome on our list, they are welcome in 
>our dialogue. But they are not our representatives. They are 
>representatives of their own memberships. I don't see how anyone can 
>deny this simple observation. IG organizations should not have a 
>dual, contradictory role. And since RIRs are extremely 
>well-resourced organizations that are well-represented in every 
>conceivable IG Forum, it is hard to understand this manufactured 
>complaint about their somehow being excluded and powerless in these 
>dialogues. It is getting a bit silly, is 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080602/05a1bada/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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