[governance] Trying to "fix" the list

[Parminder]

Hi All

The IGC charter gives IGC many clear organizational responsibilities, 
that require both some amount of discipline and collective decision 
making capacity, which we all realize often does not exist at present.

It is our responsibility to ensure that we evolve in the direction 
whereby we can best fulfill our mandate. Unfortunately, we often seem to 
be going in the opposite direction, and I am very concerned about it, 
like many others who have repeatedly expressed similar concerns.

We already have a membership group and a non-member list subscribers 
group. We can make use of this distinction wherever needed to ensure we 
are able to properly do things that we are mandated to do.

I understand that the IGC mandate can be seen to have two aspects

(1) to be an open space for exchange of information and discussion on IG 
issues, chiefly global IG issues

(2) to undertake public interest advocacy in global IG spaces

The two aspects of IGC's mandate have different organizational 
requirements. (1) above requires it to be an open space, least 
encumbered by any rules, exclusions etc except the very basic ones which 
are required to be enforced in any public place to allow a reasonable 
discussion. The aspect (2) of the mandate however clearly requires more 
specific organizational and outcome-achieving capacities. No one is 
advocating IGC becoming a typical formal organization, and we indeed 
have achieved very considerable advocacy outcomes in the past. In this 
sense IGC indeed is a very unique organization or group. And we need to 
keep evolving on the same unique path.

I think it may be in order to have a members only e-list, something like 
IGC-mmbers at lists.cpsr.org, plus another general IGC discussion list 
which can continue to be the same list as the present one. All 
discussions should take place on the general IGC list. Attempts at 
developing consensus should also first be attempted on the general list 
- in any case the overall discussion towards seeking consensus should 
take place on the general list.

However, as and if required, issues requiring specific decisions should 
move to the members list. Here, if needed, simple voting can be used to 
decide issues. Issues that may need decisions include anything that can 
be causing serious disruptive effect on the IGC (and you know what I are 
taking about here).

In fact if a decision is put to the members list - whether it is a 
substantive one, like when consensus on an advocacy issue is becoming 
difficult, or that related to IGC maintenance and discipline - IGC 
members are expected to feel more responsible to so something about it. 
In the present situation where IGC space often looks so alien and 
unowned by anyone, it becomes easy for members to abdicate responsibility.

What I propose and seek here has significant resonance with the acute 
'political' crisis we face globally as well locally across the world 
today - societies and communities are losing means and, consequently, 
motivation for collective decision making in areas where such decisions 
are crucial to our survival. In IGC too we face such an existential 
moment. And unlike the global crisis it is much easier for us involved 
in this group to do our bit and make a change. We may also be, in the 
process, taking a small step towards addressing the stated global crisis.

parminder



Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It would be a fundamental change to the openness of the list. 
> Especially given the number of well respected people who are 
> participants on the list and not 'members'.
>
> I would not be in favor because it is a movement away from 
> transparency (not matter what i feel about being personally baited 
> from time to time) and because it would end a very important kind of 
> outreach this list has - one can sign up, be here, participate and 
> then decide to join when it came time to vote on something (or sooner 
> if wished).
>
> If anything i would recommend, and support, the creation of smaller 
> side lists that were topical and project oriented (i.e. to write a 
> statement on x), closed for posting to IGC members and invited others, 
> but with open archives.
>
> a.
>
> On 12 Aug 2009, at 10:07, Ginger Paque wrote:
>
>> Is it possible for us to propose and implement a trial procedure to 
>> later be voted upon and approved by the list?
>>
>> Can we ask cpsr to open another list for the IGC, called "related 
>> topics". This would be an open list. We would change the governance 
>> list from an open list to a moderated membership, where new members 
>> would have to be approved by the coordinators upon signing up.
>>
>> Coordinators could transfer any thread to the related topic list if 
>> it is not directly related to IG process substance. This would be one 
>> of the duties of the coordinators, and would not require approval, 
>> vote or consensus.
>>
>> After 60 days or so, we could vote on the procedure and add it to the 
>> charter.
>>
>> Is this practical, appropriate, legal?
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> I ran into Alejandro Pissanty (sp?) yesterday and he thinks we should 
>> take pre-emptive action and remove three people. I do not think that 
>> is a proper procedure, although I have to admit, I would be willing 
>> to do it, and then resign for improper conduct, if I thought the ICG 
>> would be able to make it stick :o)
>>
>> gp
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090812/e1aaedfc/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