[governance] Re: Formal public warning to Suresh
Abdul Jaleel Shittu
omomeji at gmail.com
Mon Apr 8 02:47:53 EDT 2013
I hope those directly involved in this imbroglio will take their course
offline and settle it amicably among themselves, instead of dragging camps
that supposed to be a united front. Misunderstanding, misinterpretation,
etc will not ceased to exit in any community, but a mutual understanding
and respect would always be a path to peaceful co-existence.
Thanks
On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Izumi AIZU <aizu at anr.org> wrote:
> Frankly speaking, being a non-Native English speaker, I do not sense
> much nuances whether this message is a real personal attack or just
> some harsh comment but can be accepted, as constructively critical
> comments. I also understand sometimes people get passionated and
> hence become using strong words.
>
> However, it is discouraging many of us who don't want to be caught
> between two fires and have some silencing effect.
>
> In the context that the former decision of the coordinator(s) (when
> I was in transition) was appealed to the Appeal Team and found
> reversed, I understand how difficult this time the two coordinators
> felt, but went ahead. I appreciate your efforts.
>
> Having said that, as Milton and others point out, bringing one side
> of the argument on the table and leave other side intact may not
> be the best option.
>
> izumi
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 2013/4/8 Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net>
>
>> Thank you. This warning still leaves the question I had askd unanswered,
>> and contributes to prop up a set of actors that have consistently shown
>> themselves as hostile to any constructive engagement to the technical
>> community.
>>
>> If that viewpoint retains the support of the caucus coordinators, I would
>> actually prefer to permanently withdraw from the caucus, while repeating my
>> caution that the agenda being followed by it4change here is, longer term,
>> entirely to the detriment of civil society at large.
>>
>> --srs (iPad)
>>
>> On 08-Apr-2013, at 2:59, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
>>
>> > [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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> >> Izumi Aizu <<
>
> Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
>
> Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
> Japan
> * * * * *
> << Writing the Future of the History >>
> www.anr.org
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
--
..................................................
Abdul Jaleel Kehinde Shittu (PhD)
http://about.me/abduljaleelshittu.
"It is one attitude, not one aptitude, that determines one altitude in
life".
"In the presence of greatness, pettiness disappears. In the absence of a
great dream, pettiness prevails."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130408/01c4c5a1/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list