[governance] IGC nominees for MAG

[Adam Peake]

I asked Markus yesterday on the MAG list about the process for 
rotation, what's expected next in terms of timeline etc.  He replied 
to say the matter is out of his hands and could we be patient.  He 
hopes for news from New York soon, but in the mean time it's never 
too early to start the process.

Seems the MAG's suggestions from the last consultation are now with 
the secretary general's office -- not a surprise given the SG 
directed the MAG to propose a means of rotation that he'd then want 
to see the proposal before agreeing to it!

So starting a process as Parminder's done is the right way forward.

What can we learn from the process used in 2006 
<http://www.nomadicity.net/IGC-candidates-for-IGF-MAG.html>

Perhaps begin by discussing criteria?  Situation now's different from 
2006, but anyway here's what was used then:

"Criteria

The criteria the IGC NomCom used were originally discussed on the 
Internet Governance caucus list and then discussed by the NomCom 
before making their selections.

The basic criteria established before the first choices were made include:

     * Must be active civil society participants
     * Should be at least 2 from each of the 5 geographical regions if possible
     * Should attempt to achieve gender balance
     * Should include as much diversity as possible; e.g. for skill 
and knowledge set, age, disability, etc.
     * Should include people who have shown commitment to keeping CS 
updated on developments
     * Should be people who have shown ability to lobby governments in 
order to help achieve CS positions

A working statement of the criteria is best expressed by a quote from 
one of the members of the NomCom:

To that end, people we appoint should have a stated (and, I would 
hope, demonstrated) commitment to consultation and thoughtful 
dialogue with the community. We should seek a diversity of views and 
talents on the committee, but one constant should be good 
communication. This is more than participation on the list; it also 
includes listening, mediating,facilitating, trying to build consensus 
-- and, most importantly, being able to articulate the truly held 
views of others even when you disagree with them." (end)


Rotation of a third means a couple of people, as we believe CS is 
under represented I hope we can also make the case for additional CS 
members, how we argue that will be important (I hope on the merits of 
civil society's contributions to WSIS and the IGF, as the largest 
group of participants at the meetings, and substantive contributors 
to workshops and other events, rather than arguing some other group 
has too many.)

Adam
____________________________________________________________
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