[governance] Internet Technical Community Background Document to OECD Ministerial

[McTim]

MMilton,

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com]
>> Perhaps because of the very rejection of I* orgs as CS we have seen on
>> this list, most recently from the NomCom?
>
>
> But that was my point. It is clear that the rejection works in the other
> direction. I* orgs don't want to be associated with us in any way that
> is important (i.e., cooperating in the highly visible OECD Forum).
>

Despite your efforts to efforts paint me as a "self-identified
spokesperson" for the Internet technical community, I have never
claimed this role, only given my opinion on the matter.  These
organizations all have quite capable spokespeople.   It seems to me
that they were highly cooperative with the OECD (another example of
EC!).

I don't know if the OECD is "important" or not, but surely you  think
that your own organisations IGF workshop
(http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/showmelist.php?mem=10) is
"important", and your getting lots of love from the technical
community on it, so your own efforts seem to deny the point that you
were trying to make about rejection.

>> > When the OECD process started, some of us in CS tried very hard to
>> > include ISOC and the "TC" in the same stakeholder forum. In fact we
>> > ended up with silos that segregated the two.
>>
>> So you do consider the existing Internet governance organisations to
> be
>> CS?
>>
>
> If you mean ICANN and RIRs, those are governance organizations.

and you are now of the view that a governance organisation CANNOT be
CS?  What about my example of a School Board, composed of volunteers
from the community that the school serves,
no government involved anywhere, open, transparent election processes,
etc. That to me is a CS body that also does "governance".

CS needs
> to approach them either as critics, supporters or participants (or a mix
> of all 3), but not be acting _on behalf of_ them.

I can't parse the above.
Are you saying that CS can't act on behalf of governance bodies or vice versa?


 They are both
> "multistakeholder" orgs, of course, so many members and participants are
> CS.
> ISOC straddles business and CS.

While it is true that the Internet Society has businesses as members,
I must point out that this does not disqualify them from CS.  If that
were the case, then many on this list could not be counted as CS
(except for the fact of self identification).  Such
self-identification is at the heart of our charter, the NomCom has
done away with this self-identification in the case of fulltime staff
of "existing Internet governance bodies" in that they can
self-identify as much as they want, but they can't have the same
rights you have Milton, and I think that's absolute rubbish.

-- 
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