[governance] [bestbits] HLLM in LOndon - CS reps
Ginger Paque
gpaque at gmail.com
Tue Dec 10 11:03:10 EST 2013
+1 George and Jeannette. Thanks! gp
Ginger (Virginia) Paque
IG Programmes, DiploFoundation
*The latest from Diplo...* *Upcoming online courses in Internet governance:
Master in Contemporary Diplomacy with Internet Governance specialisation,
Critical Internet Resources and Infrastructure, ICT Policy and Strategic
Planning, and Privacy and Personal Data Protection. Read more and apply
at http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses <http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses>*
On 10 December 2013 09:58, George Sadowsky <george.sadowsky at gmail.com>wrote:
> I strongly share Jeanette's opinion.
>
> Representatives of civil society causes (RCSC) (that characterization
> typifies many of the people on the list, I think) have both positive
> messages and concerns. The positive messages are those that many of us
> automatically subscribe to when they are expressed at the highest level,
> such as 'freedom of expression. These are positive messages.
>
> The concerns come because such desired states are often weakened by
> others, typically by governments but also by certain trends in other
> sectors. Hence the need, often expressed by RCSCs to be 'at the table'
> with other sectors, comes from the possibility that these positions will be
> eroded, consciously or unconsciously, by other sectors. The desire to be
> included is a quite understandable reaction to that possibility.
>
> But what I don't understand is the intense internal process and disputes
> regarding who gets to represent a group that appears homogeneous at the top
> level. Is the homogeneity superficial? If so, it would be more useful to
> explore and understand the differences within the RCSC. Is the dispute
> based upon ideological purity of the process for selection? That seems
> counterproductive and generally a waste of time to me. Is the dispute
> based upon lack of trust among group members? Are there other reasons. Is
> the representation process an end in itself, regardless of its effect upon
> pursuing other CS goals. If so, then perhaps this should be reconstituted
> as a political science theory group.
>
> It seems to me that rather than spending so much time discussing and
> debating representation issues, it would be more useful to discuss why
> representation issues are so important, often IMO to the detriment of
> working on real civil society issues.
>
> I'm with Jeanette. Concentrate upon issues, and that means areas of
> agreement and disagreement with other sectors as well as within the RCSC
> community. Disputes about representation seem unproductive, unless they
> imply unaddressed issues within the community. If so, it surely seems
> more productive to address them directly rather than through this proxy
> dispute based on representation.
>
> George
>
>
> On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:29 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>
> > I fully agree with Rafik's concern. In fact, both the IGC and the
> > bestbits list seem to have become rather obsessed with filling positions
> > on various committtees.
> >
> > In another message from last week that probably got lost or still awaits
> > the moderator's approvement, I noticed a growing madness about committee
> > positions and other appointments which is more or less pushing aside
> > the debate over issues and opinions.
> >
> > Besides, I also think that a distinction should be made between
> > appointed experts and stakeholder representatives. Generally, I wished
> > we paid less attention to the issue of representatives and focused more
> > on the message we want to convey.
> >
> > jeanette
> >
> > Am 10.12.13 14:49, schrieb Rafik Dammak:
> >> Hello,dfasfd
> >>
> >> I am wondering if we are not giving too much weight to HLM than it
> >> should be and doing for it a free promotion! honestly, I was not in
> >> favour of the ICANN strategic panels since they are not bottom-up,
> >> formed by handpicked members and bypassing the usual process. I found
> >> now that we want badly to be in that high level panel and making it
> >> relevant and maybe even giving it a big role for Brazil meeting! hope
> >> that we wont regret such decision later.
> >>
> >> we can ask for giving inputs, openness etc but that will be definitely
> >> depending to the will ICANN/WEF/Anneberg Foundation and there won't be
> >> any guarantee on how they process the inputs or how it will be included
> >> in their deliverable. everything is ad-hoc there and any decision will
> >> depend to the will of the organisers. why shall we encourage such
> process?
> >>
> >> Back to the previous discussion, Bill was invited as expert and the name
> >> of panel is not "an expert group" , I don't see the confusion here.
> >>
> >> Rafik
> >>
> >>
> >> 2013/12/10 Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com
> >> <mailto:mariliamaciel at gmail.com>>
> >>
> >> Milton is right about the (lack of) process. On the one hand, it is
> >> positive that we have someone we trust there. On the other hand, it
> >> does seem that they are including who they want and how they want,
> >> totally disregarding the serious process we have been conducting to
> >> appoint names.
> >>
> >> I think that a letter signed by all organizations that participated
> >> in the nomination process should be sent to ICANN and ideally read
> >> during the meeting, expressing our frustration and adding some
> >> concrete suggestions. I come back to the points I made earlier:
> >> - the agenda of the HL panel meetings should be publicized in advance
> >> - channels to receive inputs (procedural or substantive) should be
> >> created or clarified
> >> - their meetings should be open to observers (like the meetings of
> >> the CSTD ECWG)
> >> - Reports of the meetings should be published. They could follow
> >> Chatam House rules
> >> And
> >> - CS representatives (names), who were appointed following an
> >> internal and legitimate process carried out by CS, should be
> >> immediately included in the HL panel to ensure minimum CS
> >> representation.
> >>
> >> Marília
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:35 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch
> >> <mailto:nb at bollow.ch>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu <mailto:mueller at syr.edu>>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > The distinction between Bill's appointment as an expert and
> >> the CS
> >> > groups' nomination of people to be on the committee is not so
> >> clear
> >> > to me, and we cannot assume that it is clear to Fadi,
> especially
> >> > since the London meeting of the group starts in two days.
> >> Either one
> >> > could be seen as Fadi making a concession to CS demands to be
> >> > included in the HLLM, and he may consider one to be a
> >> substitute for
> >> > the other. At this stage, I would assume that if there is no
> >> > appointment of another CS rep to the HL Panel by now, that
> >> there will
> >> > not be one at all, and Bill is all we will be given. The fact
> >> that
> >> > Bill's appointment came from a random F2F hallway meeting
> isn't
> >> > something that inspires confidence, is it?
> >>
> >> +1
> >>
> >> Especially given that there was in fact a coordinated civil
> society
> >> process through which names have been put forward.
> >>
> >> Greetings,
> >> Norbert
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> >.
> >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> *Marília Maciel*
> >> Pesquisadora Gestora
> >> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio
> >>
> >> Researcher and Coordinator
> >> Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School
> >> http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts
> >>
> >> DiploFoundation associate
> >> www.diplomacy.edu <http://www.diplomacy.edu>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
> >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131210/639b1b12/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