[governance] Formal public warning to Suresh

Mon Apr 8 02:37:21 EDT 2013

Agree with Milton

Sivasubramanian M
On Apr 8, 2013 7:21 AM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

> Norbert:
> As an IGC member I disagree with this decision to issue a formal public
> warning to Suresh. It seems you are singling out one person when a group of
> people was engaged in an argument, and all of them contributed messages
> that were similar in tenor to his. A better way to approach this problem
> would be to intervene in the argument and inform the participants that we
> don't think it is a productive exchange and we don't think the spirit of
> the exchanges was conducive to constructive discussion.
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-
> > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow
> > Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2013 5:30 PM
> > To: Suresh Ramasubramanian
> > Cc: IGC
> > Subject: [governance] Formal public warning to Suresh
> >
> > [This notification is from both coordinators of the IGC, jointly, in
> > execution of their responsibility as described in the IGC Charter.]
> >
> > Hello Suresh
> >
> > Unfortunately the problem persists that you are posting messages which,
> > in the words of the IGC Charter, “cause an IGC list to become a hostile
> > environment”.
> >
> > Among these unacceptable messages are those which contain personal
> > attacks, of which a recent example is included below. Personal attacks
> > have not only an unpleasant or even hurtful effect on the target of the
> > attack, but they also deny everyone else the opportunity of
> > participating in a discussion environment that is conductive to
> > constructive discussion and reflection.
> >
> > More generally, all kinds of postings are unacceptable which are
> > designed to render it impossible for some civil society viewpoint (on
> > any Internet governance topic, as per WGIG's definition) to be discussed
> > in a non-hostile environment.
> >
> > In fact you have, despite all admonitions to the contrary, continued to
> > make a series of consistent attacks against some IGC members, including
> > directly personal attacks as well as claims that their viewpoints are
> > somehow totally inappropriate.
> >
> > As foreseen by the IGC Charter, you are hereby notified that in case you
> > continue the practice of posting such unacceptable messages, your
> > posting rights will be suspended for one month.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Norbert and Sala
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----
> > From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net>
> > Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2013 17:30:01 +0530
> > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>,
> > parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
> > Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: Final composition of the CSTD Working
> > Group on Enhanced Cooperation
> >
> >
> > As I asked guru, why is it any of your business who a focal point for
> > another constituency chooses?
> >
> > And if your entire participation in this process is to be limited to
> > such divisive politics, I am not quite sure if you deserve to be one of
> > the cs representatives in this process, and would urge the cs focal
> > point to strongly reconsider, at the risk of introducing a divisive
> > agenda into the process, hampering it rather than contributing
> > positively to it.
> >
> > --srs (iPad)
> >
> > On 30-Mar-2013, at 17:11, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > On Friday 29 March 2013 10:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
> > >> Wow, Gotcha...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 1:18 AM, parminder
> > >> <parminder at itforchange.net> w=
> > rote:
> > >>> On Friday 29 March 2013 08:03 PM, McTim wrote:
> > >>>> <snip>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> you are incorrect.  The folk who are involved in Internet2, amongst
> > >>>> other REN projects are EXACTLY those people that the FP would
> > >>>> include.
> > >>>
> > >>> So you are saying that members of Internet2 fit the definition of
> > >>> technical (and academic) community that the focal point gave us
> > >>> which is "community of organizations and individuals who are
> > >>> involved in the day-to-day operational management of the Internet
> > >>> and who work within this community" ? You think that Internet2 is
> > >>> involved in 'day to say operational management of the Internet'?
> > >>>
> > >> I think probably yes <http://www.internet2.edu/membership/index.cfm>
> > >
> > > What I hear is that Adam, Mctim, and perhaps one another are saying
> > > that Internet2 project members meet the definition of 'those involved
> > > in day to day operational management of the Internet' and thus would
> > > be eligible as representatives of 'tech and academic community' on the
> > > WG on enhanced cooperation and such bodies, as per what we have heard
> > > from the concerned focal point.
> > >
> > > I will be happy if ISOC as the focal point can confirm this. Let them
> > > tell us whom all did they distribute the call for nominations to, and
> > > we will indirectly get out answer. BTW, the initial mandate of the
> > > focal points was simply to 'assist the CSTD Chair in reaching out to
> > > the interested parties in their respective regional or stakeholder
> > > groups and to facilitate consultations '.
> > >
> > > Let ISOC give a report on whom all did they reach out to and held
> > > consultations with. Such a report is a basic requirement to be made
> > > public. The WG on IGF Improvements clearly instructs documentation and
> > > publication of such processes by those involved in stakeholder rep
> > > selection, and there is no reason it should not be done in this case.
> > > This is a basic requirement of transparency, isnt it.
> > >
> > > Meanwhile, I do not see how Internet2 members can be considered as
> > > being 'involved' in day to day operational management of the
> > > Internet.... There are various kinds of techies there working on
> > > technology innovation, there are universities involved, there are even
> > > two music schools involved there....
> > >
> > > But if indeed, those who work on Internet related innovations in the
> > > field are to be included, why was Michael's nomination rejected - not
> > > on intrinsic merit, but on non eligibility.... Michael works with
> > > various field based Internet innovations, including for instance
> > > projects involving setting specific technical configurations for
> > > facilitating tele medicine for aboriginal communities.... Community
> > > informatics is lot about such kind of stuff. And so, Michael should
> > > have even qualified for the tech part of tech-academic community, what
> > > to say about the 'academic' part....
> > >
> > >
> > > I think ISOC is clear when they say that they only include those
> > > working with organisations involved in day to day operation of the
> > > Internet  - and these are ICANN, ISOC perhaps for IETF/ IAB etc, RIR,
> > > root servers and perhaps country cctlds....
> > >
> > > And if one is working with any of these organisations, it is not even
> > > necessary to be either a techie or an academic. You just must be
> > > working with these above organisations, Perhaps you know that
> > > Constance, who is now on the WG, is neither a techie nor an academic,
> > > she is policy and law professional. She is there just because she is
> > > with ISOC. And so ISOC is rather consistent with a narrow
> > > interpretation of their definition.
> > >
> > > The creteria used by concerned Focal Point ISOC is rather clear - even
> > > if I strongly disagree with it. And Internet2 members would in no case
> > > make to their list. Evidence of it would be in the fact that
> > > - although they are on OECD Technical Community Advisory Committee  -
> > > I am relatively sure that the Focal Point did not reach out to the
> > > Internet2 group, and such others, when it was asked to do stakeholder
> > > outreach. If I am wrong on this, I am happy to be corrected and ISOC
> > > may publish the process documentations telling us whom all did they
> > > out reach to.
> > >
> > > parminder
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Adam
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>> And that therefore Internet2 members could have been considered as
> > >>> nominees from the technical and academic community by the focal
> > >>> point for the WG on EC?
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Strange that they qualify for OECD body as technical community but
> > >>>>> not for the UN system.....
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Evidently, the definition of even the technical community part of
> > >>>>> the 'technical and academic community' employed by the Focal point
> > >>>>> is erronoeus, what to say about the 'academic community' part
> > >>>>> which seem to have simply been banished.
> > >>>> but they haven't been, you are simply mistaken.
> > >>>
> > >>> How am I mistaken? Who is the academic community member in the final
> > >>> list? Like someone not closely associated with ISOC and not running
> > >>> a country tld whereby one qualifies through the above definition of
> > >>> being engaged in 'day to day operational management of the
> > >>> Internet'?
> > >>>
> > >>> parminder
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130408/0e15b8b8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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