[governance] Procedural issue Re: Revised version of statement...

[Norbert Bollow]

Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu> wrote:

> I would agree with Parminder that the non-mention of open standards
> as part of open Internet is in the accidental oversight category.
> 
> We could fix it later when massaging text assuming theme is
> accepted, or fix it now, but I do understand that might not work for
> procedural reasons...

If the procedural concern is that adding a sentence about the
importance of open standards may be too big a change to make
within the context of the current Consensus Call, it would
seem to me that the reasonable way to address this point is
to declare that the Consensus Call has shown lack of consensus
for the version of the statement that addresses only the issue
of "old media and telecommunications empires" but not also the
importance of minimizing, through open standards, further ICT
monopolization. This step could be immediately followed by
publishing a new Consensus Call for a revised text.

Greetings,
Norbert

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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