[governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)

[Milton L Mueller]

Let them veto it. Make the decision transparent, let the public discuss it - at the consultation and at the main sessions of the Vilnius IGF.
Just be sure that the call for a rights theme is clear and well-phrased enough so that we can better make an issue of it.
Instead of using "alternate wording" on the vain hope that authoritarians can somehow be tricked into participating in a discourse on individual rights, use even clearer, sharper language to ensure that everyone knows what is happening when the MAG vetoes it.

--MM

________________________________
From: Ginger Paque [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 07, 2010 7:59 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeanette Hofmann
Cc: William Drake; McTim; Parminder
Subject: [governance] Wording to prevent a deadlock (re: Jeanette)

Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
"Just to reiterate what I said, certain MAG members will veto a main session on rights. I didn't say that we should give up on this topic as Jeremy suggests. I said we should be inventive and find new, perhaps more abstract wording that offers a way out of this deadlock. I cannot think of anything good at the moment but perhaps something such as 'legal provisions' would work? "

I understand Jeannette's concern, and agree that we need to address it. However, we have not been able to come up with alternate wording. I hope we can discuss options for interventions at the Monday evening meeting at Les Brasseurs, which will help us find common ground with the other stakeholders, so that the OC can develop an effective proposal to address IRP.

If you have any ideas, please post them. We have some possibilities to consider:

legal provisions (Jeanette)
Human/personal/individual aspects of Internet Governance
Human/personal/individual dimensions of Internet Governance
Internet governance and the position of individuals
Internet governance and individuals

gp

Jeanette Hofmann wrote:


William Drake wrote:

Hi

On Feb 7, 2010, at 8:51 AM, McTim wrote:


Perhaps you could send me the link to the thread where it was
defined? I've 63 threads in my Inbox containing the term, and can't
find a definition of it in any of them.

McTim, Parminder, you are both right.  R&P is a broad and
underspecified concept, which makes it a bit of a hard sell, AND the
caucus has endorsed it several times and it enjoys a lot of support
here.  The latter trumps the former,

Why? Majority trumps reason?

so it should be included in the

statement.

Just to reiterate what I said, certain MAG members will veto a main session on rights. I didn't say that we should give up on this topic as Jeremy suggests. I said we should be inventive and find new, perhaps more abstract wording that offers a way out of this deadlock. I cannot think of anything good at the moment but perhaps something such as 'legal provisions' would work?

jeanette


Best,

Bill____________________________________________________________ You
received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org> To be removed from the list, send any
message to: governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>

For all list information and functions, see: http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
    governance at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
    governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>

For all list information and functions, see:
    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100207/ba88d017/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t