[governance] What this debate is really about

[McTim]

Carlos,

On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 5:57 PM, Carlos Afonso <ca at rits.org.br> wrote:
> For one, the list you make is misinformed (no reason for you to be
> misinformed, as this info is in English in the CGI.br website) -- these are
> names of CGI.br projects, not independent organizations.

How is that relevant to the question, which I note that you have not
answered.  I will try to re-word it for your convenience;

If one of the staff of the .br ccTLD was a member of this caucus AND
wanted to be nominated to the IGF MAG from this caucus (instead of by
your region), but was excluded from this possibility by the decision
made by our 2008 NomCom, would you be happy?


>
> Milton just repeats the simple fact that a (strong) number of stakeholders
> in the MAG belong to a group with a common vision and defend the group's
> positions in a very proactive, insistent and organized manner.

That is irrelevant to our abused process.


Unlike many
> NGO's reps (let us please play down this Snow White tale of "in their
> individual capacities" as if they were had not become MAG members by the
> wish of some interest group), some of their vocals are well paid to do this
> and to be present in the meetings.

A) this is also irrelevant to our abused process

B)  I would suggest this is "just like" and not "unlike many NGO reps".


>
> Are they wrong? No, this is an opportunity they have been given by the
> circumstances, and they have seized this opportunity to almost take over the
> space -- the example Milton points out (the incredible resistance against
> who controls or ought to control the logical infrastructure becoming a main
> theme of the IGF) being an obvious example.

So because there are so many of "them" already on the MAG, it's ok to
for "us" to exclude them from our nomination to the MAG?

>
> The heated discussion we are witnessing is in essence a dispute to preserve
> or reinforce such dominance in light of the 1/3 renewal, period.
>

no, it's not.  It's about fairness and legitimacy of our decsion
amking processes.


> So, let us move on to the themes, to the workshops, to the process of the
> IGF itself etc -- this is not going to change whatever the screams and
> diatribes we send to each other's screens.

I think it was Henry Louis Mencken who said "if you want peace, work
for justice.  This has recently morphed into "Know justice, know
peace" which in turn, has morphed into "no justice, no peace".

-- 
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