[governance] Re: Nomcom and conflict of interest

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Jeanette, thank you for making this point.

The two corollaries to this that I'd submit are that

Corrollary 1 -

CS is traditionally a very diverse group and its value lies in the
diversity of its opinions. 

There is, still, a certain shared set of believes, a value system, that
more accurately defines CS than the sweeping "Government, Industry and
whatever's left" old fashioned 3 stakeholder model.  CS cuts across these
stakeholder communities just as much as the technical community does. 

I'm sure you've read this book - Civil Society and Government, ed Nancy
Rosenblum and Robert Post (http://press.princeton.edu/titles/7214.html) -
parts of it are available on books.google.com and show just how diverse
opinion is on this subject.

Corollary 2 -

The nomcomm volunteered to pick the right candidate(s) to represent CS
views.  I respect the amount of time, and the commitment to this cause,
that their volunteering shows. What I dont respect at all is an arbitrary
decision of excluding an entire class on the grounds that they are not CS
(and on which opinion clearly differs even within this caucus), and then
not coming back to the caucus for consensus on this decision.

If this exclusion were on the basis of (say) disability, arguing that the
strenuous routine of conference calls and travels would mean that a
disabled person wouldnt be able to effectively represent CS, the caucus
would have been in an uproar by now.

[yes i realize its a slippery slope argument, and I for one consider
slippery slope a fallacy, but it is a favorite style of argument among some
CS groups, and what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, I guess]

	suresh

Jeanette Hofmann [31/05/08 18:47 +0100]:
> Having followed this discussion now for I don't know how long, my  
> personal conclusion is that exclusions based on formal stakeholder  
> categories is neither fair nor very effective. We might exclude people  
> we would be happy to nominate or we might nominate people as CS although  
> they are only partly CS because they are also something else (run a  
> company, work for a government, an ISP, or whatever). It seems thus not  
> easy to apply such a general rule in a consistent and fair way.
>
> If we abolish this rule, however, we increase the burden of the nomcom  
> as it will be up to the nomcom to decide whether or not somebody  
> actually embodies CS spirit, despite any affiliations. This is not easy  
> to do. Judging from past nomination results, civil society reps on the  
> MAG form a rather diverse group - much more diverse than the reps from  
> the Internet industry including ICANN and the technical community, and  
> in my view too diverse to have much of an impact as a stakeholder group.
>
> Nonetheless, I would prefer to delegate nomination related decisions to  
> a nomcom and dispose of any formal exclusions. If this requires a change  
> of our charter I support such a change.
>
> jeanette
>
> Parminder wrote:
>>>> If that is the case, then it should be dealt with on an individual
>>>> basis in the NomCom, OR we change the charter to exclude govt/PS/$.
>>> That's my point. Excluding them as a class is just not on. Picking
>>> specific
>>> examples like Bertrand, or Stefano, or the Nigerian IT secretary, or
>>> whoever
>>> else isn't a very valid reason for such exclusion.
>>>
>>> 	srs
>>
>> Just to make sure, I take it that those who profess the above line, will
>> have no problem nominating a government official (esp someone directly
>> dealing with an area of policy IGC engages with) as IGC's rep to MAG, and
>> for other positions/ places. And that they are ready to freely consider any
>> such person as CS. 
>>
>>
>> Parminder 
>>
>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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

-- 
Suresh Ramasubramanian | suresh at hserus.net | gpg EDEDEFB9
email sturmbahnfuehrer | lower middle class unix sysadmin
____________________________________________________________
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