[governance] IGC nominees for MAG

[DRAKE William]

Hi Adam,

Adam Peake wrote:

 > Rotation of a third means a couple of people

So re: Vittorio's question earlier today about whether the 1/3 shouldn't 
be annual retroactively, meaning 2/3 this time, the expectation is that 
no, it'll only be 1/3 going forward, presumably because of the 
specialized skill sets needed to select main session speakers, ascertain 
that workshop proposals are multistakeholder, etc, which require years 
of experience to develop?  So some people will be on the MAG for a 
minimum of four years, perhaps more if the rule is that one must 
volunteer to leave?  Just trying to understand...

> 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

To these one might add:

*On the first point, active in IG processes per se, preferably in the 
caucus.  People not active in the caucus seem rather unlikely to feel a 
responsibilitz to keep the caucus updated on developments, and can and 
probably will be nominated by other entitites.
*Ability and commitment to actually showing up for MAG meetings and 
participating on the list--empty chairs, physical or virtual, don't do a 
lot of good, particularly given the underrepresentation.
*Never having vocally advocated any positions that might have been 
perceived to be 'controversial' in some unstated manner by some unnamed 
group deemded to be more important, since such offenders probably 
wouldn't be selected even with assurances of role/shape shifting 
capacities (a CS-specific rule).

These criteria, if followed, would suggest that we cannot take the path 
of least resistence and simply resubmit the names previously agreed but 
that were not selected last time.  So we just need to identify 2-3 new, 
active, diverse, travel-enabled saints from the IGC.  Piece of cake!

Cheers,

Bill


____________________________________________________________
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