[governance] NOMCOM - MAG nominations

[Adam Peake]

>  > Hi Parminder,
>>
>>  Please take note that it's Easter week, major holiday in many
>>  countries, including Monday as day off. Is it possible to consider an
>>  extended deadline, e.g. Wednesday, rather than Monday? It's important
>>  that this process of nominating MAG members doesn't lead to any
>>  dispute, at least regarding procedural matters.
>>
>>  Meryem
>
>Meryem
>
>I will publish the full schedule of the process by tomorrow but we have
>decided that members can volunteer up to the 31st of May.
>
>Meanwhile we propose to start/ keep up a discussion on criteria that the
>nomcom may use.


Parminder,

Suggest we begin with the recommendations from the MAG that will go 
to the secretary general:

"6.  While not perfect, the balance of the current MAG was felt to be 
reasonable. However, it was  generally agreed that there was room for 
improvement with regard to the gender balance as well as 
representation of developing countries."

and,

"10. With regard to the MAG's operating principles and selection 
criteria, the group reaffirmed that members served in their 
individual capacity. They emphasized that the work of the MAG was 
collegial and based on consensus and there was a need for procedural 
flexibility. The anonymity and non-attribution of the discussions was 
recognized as a crucial principle of the MAG's work. In concrete 
terms, this principle, known as the Chatham House Rule, allows 
participants to use the information received, but neither to reveal 
the identity nor the affiliation of the speakers. Members should 
possess relevant knowledge and willingness to reach out and ensure 
continuous flow of information to and from interested groups. There 
was agreement that active and constructive participation of all 
members was required. Members were expected to take part in three 
meetings in Geneva, as well as in the annual IGF meeting and 
participate in online preparatory work. Ways of financing attendance 
of developing country members are being explored. All meetings also 
provide tools for remote members' participation."

These are not the caucus' rules, we're not bound by them, but it 
would be a good idea to keep them in mind (if we submit a batch of 
names saying they are the representatives of the caucus, people we 
have power of recall over, etc, this may not sit well with the idea 
that members serve in their individual capacity. The MAG's 
recommendations came from the consultation process.)

Looks like members from developing countries will be supported 
financially. Being able to commit the time important, about a 
month/year for travel (MAG meetings are 3 days, IGF 4 days, unless 
the person's based in Europe, travel to Geneva takes a while.) 
Participating remotely in MAG meetings is possible, CS members have 
done so.

I think Milton and Bill suggested MAG members needed few skills. And 
that's generally true, members aren't arguing the rights and wrongs 
of an issue like a session panelist might, but do need enough 
knowledge to be able to persuade others that a range of issues are 
important (no accident that Robin's expertise on "openness" has lead 
to issues featuring prominently.) Should have a broad knowledge of a 
range of Internet policy issues, with deeper expertise in a few (got 
to understand the issues CS organizations are saying important, can't 
just parrot texts written by others, and know when others are wrong, 
etc) Should have a good network of people (regional/global).

Multi-stakeholder: it needs people who can be persuasive, who will 
listen to/try to accommodate other points of view. The MAG tries to 
be "collegial and based on consensus". Strident advocacy tends not to 
work.

Should be willing to do work at the IGF meetings, from setting up 
tables to moderating workshops etc.

MAG isn't a high level group, but experience working in 
committees/working groups helpful.

I think this comment from the 2006 nomcom criteria still relevant:

"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."

MAG members are always going to be volunteers, there's only so much 
time that a person can devote.  Looking back at WSIS very few of CS 
caucus and working group coordinators, WGIG members, came did much 
more that MAG members have been doing, i.e. don't make unrealistic 
demands. MAG members shouldn't be looking to join the group to 
exploit membership for their own or their organization's gain, they 
should put CS interests ahead their own or their organization's.

Thanks,

Adam



>I figure we still need at least around 4-5 more volunteers. But I think
>members are opting in, and we will reach the needed number.
>
>Parminder
>
>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>  From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:marzouki at ras.eu.org]
>>  Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2008 4:32 PM
>>  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>  Subject: Re: [governance] NOMCOM - MAG nominations
>>
>>  Hi Parminder,
>>
>>  Please take note that it's Easter week, major holiday in many
>>  countries, including Monday as day off. Is it possible to consider an
>>  extended deadline, e.g. Wednesday, rather than Monday? It's important
>>  that this process of nominating MAG members doesn't lead to any
>>  dispute, at least regarding procedural matters.
>>
>  > Meryem
____________________________________________________________
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