[governance] WGEC: Questionnaire on internet governance

Carlos A. Afonso ca at cafonso.ca
Fri Aug 30 10:25:40 EDT 2013 

In summary, each one decides what is the preferred way to go within a
basic  understanding of procedures. I do not think anyone in the WG will
"judge" the responses. There will be an effort by the WGEC secretariat
to consolidate them (not a job for the WG itself) -- which had the
secretariat very concerned about a tsunami of responses (I do not think
it is going to happen at all), and of course we will debate according to
the positions and views of each member on the basis of this consolidation.

The WG is not robotic, it is constituted of people with certain
qualifications and positions (this is why we assume we were called to
participate) who will convey their visions to the debate with a view to
generate a useful (hopefully) report. Consensus will happen or not
happen, as was the case of the WGIG, and this will be properly
represented (again, hopefully) in the report.

But, again, I fully respect Avri's position on this, while understanding
each member will have her/his own approach on how to be involved in the
process.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

On 08/29/2013 09:59 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> What avri is suggesting, I think, is that any wgec member's organization
> is welcome to submit a response but the specific wgec member should
> recuse him or herself from the drafting of that response so that they
> are able to evaluate it along with all the other responses, with an open
> mind.
> 
> Fairly reasonable suggestion
> 
> --srs (htc one x)
> 
> 
> ----- Reply message -----
> From: "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at cafonso.ca>
> To: "IGC" <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> Subject: [governance] WGEC: Questionnaire on internet governance
> Date: Fri, Aug 30, 2013 2:29 AM
> 
> 
> Dear Avri, I respect your position, of course.
> 
> My understanding is that we are in the WGEC (like some of us were in the
> WGIG) because we are expected to bring to the dialogue what we think are
> the views of the stakeholders we are supposed to represent, and I think
> the questionnaire is a good (although imperfect) instrument to help
> convey these views. So, even if WGEC members themselves decided to
> respond and provide their views, I would welcome it.
> 
> Thus, I do not agree we should exclude the organizations we are related
> to from this survey, and this is the position of several other
> participants who are helping to build institutional responses to the
> questionnaire.
> 
> fraternal regards
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> On 08/29/2013 04:17 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I do not know Adam's reasons.
>>
>> I know my own reasons for not doing so.  
>>
>> I think that in order to the job in WGEC as I feel I should do it, I
> should not be arguing for responses I have crafted, but rather should be
> taking the input from others who are commenting, and from the respective
> and understanding I bring,  do the analysis.  For myself I beleive that
> if I contributed to the writing of several proposals I would risk my
> objectivity in taking the work of others and treating it fairly in the
> context of WGEC.  I also beleive that my contributions in the WGEC might
> be colored, as if arguments I would make in the WGEC were just a
> bolstering of opinions I had put before the group in many other ways.
>>
>> I am speaking only for myself and the way I think such appointments
> should be handled.  This is why I avoided active participation in any of
> the several efforts I might have engaged in.
>>
>> You are right, there was no rule.  I am just doing the job in the best
> way I know how.  I have followed this process many time before and find
> it works for me.
>>
>> avri
>>
>>
>>
>> On 29 Aug 2013, at 13:57, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
>>
>>> Hi people, as a member of WGEC, I do not recall any decision that would
>>> preclude its members' organizations from presenting their responses to
>>> the questionnaire. As is well known, WGEC (like the MAG) members are
>>> there in their personal capacities as members of stakeholder groups, not
>>> as reps or "ambassadors" of their respective organizations. Where did
>>> you get this from, Adam?
>>>
>>> fraternal regards
>>>
>>> --c.a.
>>>
>>> On 08/29/2013 08:07 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:17 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Perhaps he was referring to the statement Parminder is sending
> around looking for support.  It is perhaps confusing having two
> statements in circulation: one by the Best Bits and one by Parminder who
> is a participant in both the Best Bits collective and a member of the WGEC.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, not so good when working group members are advising themselves
> in this way, multiple ways.  The IT for Change position makes many
> unsubstantiated claims, and again repeats that the Internet is a global
> commons, which it clearly is not (what's the point of engaging in honest
> debate on this list if ignored for the sake of some political doctrine?)
>  And bestbits, which I personally disagree with enough not to be able to
> support, but it much more thoughtful, but is also somewhat undermined by
> having WG members as authors.  Poor process.
>>>>
>>>> Adam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28 Aug 2013, at 06:57, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 27/08/2013, at 12:13 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian
> <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 27-Aug-2013, at 7:21, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Although the Caucus is a little fractured at the moment, Norbert
> and Sala might nevertheless wish to gauge the feeling of the Caucus
> towards signing on corporately.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would help gain broader consensus if the worst bits of that
> statement were removed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bringing ICANN under UN oversight, really?  
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since there is nothing in the submission that suggests that, I
> have to ask, did you read it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Dr Jeremy Malcolm
>>>>>> Senior Policy Officer
>>>>>> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers
>>>>>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East
>>>>>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala
> Lumpur, Malaysia
>>>>>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement
> knowledge hub
> |http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org |
> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email
> unless necessary.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
> recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For
> instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>> 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 --------------
____________________________________________________________
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