[governance] Criterion for charter voting

[Michael Gurstein]

I think what I mean is obvious especially since I've been saying more or
less the same thing for years... Yes, I think that there should be a
deliberate plan/program of engagement with the broader civil society and
particularly those elements of civil society who are active around ICTs,
social justice and the Internet globally--and there are multitudes.  The
folks active in the HR caucus for example seem to have managed to do
something of this reasonably successfully at least as I have been observing
them from a distance.

Personally, I go in and out of direct involvements which would be of
interest to or interested in IG issues depending on a variety of personal
and other circumstances... At the moment I could certainly engage with
sympathetic folks in Canada and and to a lesser extent in various other
parts of the world where I happen to be working/doing research etc. but the
problem is that to my mind we (IGC) have allowed ourselves to accept a way
too narrow definition of what IG means, rather narrower I would say than
even the IGF as a whole is now coming to accept and certainly narrower than
would be of interest to many of those who would (and should) be our allies
and compadres.

Every year about this time I write the same thing and every year folks move
on around "the bad relay point/me" but from what I can see (and again from a
distance) not having the means or the passion to get myself to Vilnius, the
IGC is, if anything, dwindling as older folks drift away and not a lot of
younger folks are recruited and certainly no great tranches of broader civil
society are engaged with.

But I'm off on a bit of a personal adventure for the next while and will
have only limited time to engage in a debate on these issues if any should
result from these rather gnarly remarks.

Best to all,

M

-----Original Message-----
From: Avri Doria [mailto:avri at psg.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 3:04 PM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] Criterion for charter voting



and why do you mean by this?

is there some activity you think the group should be engaged in, that it is
not?  
have you been doing outreach bringing in new people?

a.

On 29 Sep 2010, at 16:25, Michael Gurstein wrote:

> I don't mean to be curmudgeonly but I really would have preferred to 
> see some of the energy and creativity that is going into ensuring the
probity of the electoral system of this several handfuls of people most of
whom know each other by sight over almost a decade, into broadening and
deepening the group so that it has some broader legitimacy (and not just
legalistically) as a voice for civil society in these most significant
areas.
>  
> Mike ____________________________________________________________
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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=

____________________________________________________________
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