[governance] Mercenaries on the list

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

As I said, if they have CS cred, and CS backgrounds, they are CS, period -
whoever their employer may be.

 

Deliberately exclusionary language and positions like this are completely
against the letter and the spirit of the charter. Besides, such language
serves to  deprive you of a major asset - a large majority of CS just don't
have the necessary technical awareness to meaningfully participate in these
discussions.  

 

By alienating these people (and quite a few of them, such as Kieren, have
solid CS cred behind them), you are robbing yourself of some of your best
and most potent advocates.

 

Which is why I have, so frequently, called for DIPLO and other organizations
to empower and  facilitate bridge courses for CS to meaningfully participate
in these discussions.

 

                suresh

 

From: Guru [mailto:guru at itforchange.net] 
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2008 12:30 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Suresh Ramasubramanian
Cc: 'Rui Correia'
Subject: Re: [governance] Mercenaries on the list

 

Suresh

Repeatedly on this list, I (and Parminder and others) have sought the
definition of the 'technical community'. This term is being used ambiguously
to reflect two different ideas:

a. people who have technical expertise - such as yourself, McTim, Carlos,
Izumi etc etc
b. Organizations that are currently performing Internet
Administration/Governance (who we termed as IAB in a earlier discussion on
the list) - which basically implies the people who represent them 

I don't think it is anyones case that the first group is to be completely
kept out of CS. If that is what you are implying in your mail below, that is
the position of Parminder and Milton , then I suggest that it is a
misrepresentation.

On the other hand, wrt IAB, the position of IGC is clear. See the the Civil
Society Internet Governance Caucus's Inputs for the Open IGF Consultations,
Geneva, 26th February, 2008 -
http://www.igcaucus.org/IGC%20-%20MAG%20Rotation.pdf

"We agree that the organizations having an important role in Internet
administration and the development of Internet-related technical standards
should continue to be represented in the MAG. However, their representation
should not be at the expense of civil society participation".

As I mentioned in my previous mail, IGC selects members for the CS quota.
Hence it seems clear to me that IABs (being people who represent IABs)
cannot seek representation in MAG through IGC / with IGC endorsement.

Guru

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080526/1d31cf6e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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