[governance] caucus contribution, consultation and MAG meeting

[Nick Ashton-Hart]

Dear Norbert, FWIW:

1) I'm signed up to the list with my @ccianet.org address rather than a private address
2) Given my ICANN past and track record there and continuing work on IG and other Internet policy issues, I suspect my name and what I do for a living isn't a mystery here.
3) My sig on my handheld is neutral (for some reason the iPad isn't sending different sigs based on what address I'm sending from), on my PCs it isn' (as you can see below).
4) I think the tone and content of my interventions here makes pretty clear that I'm a strong advocate for actual people. Just because someone works for one constituency doesn't mean that they are pushing the views of that constituency 24x7. Many people on this list probably work for the for-profit sector in their daily jobs, and many if not most of those companies probably have some commercial nexus with the Internet in one way or another, but that hardly makes everything they say here suspect.
5) I am not participating here on behalf of anyone but myself. I presume that's true of most of the rest of the list, as relatively few people can make a living representing CS groups (unfortunately, in my view).

I certainly understand that those who don't work for another stakeholder community for a day-job in policy like I do should decide things, but I hardly agree that anyone in my position is incapable of proposing people-centric and/or pro civil-society positions. Ideas should succeed or fall on their merits - even if some of the proposers such as myself don't have the vote.

We are all people first, and employees second.

On 13 Feb 2013, at 12:00, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at ccianet.org> [1] wrote:
> 
>> +1 to the thought extracted below. Thanks Norbert for trying to herd
>> all the cats :)
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Nick
>> Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic
>> mangling.
>> 
>> On 12 Feb 2013, at 20:20, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
>> 
>>> I do not think that there's anything fundamentally wrong with the
>>> process that I've been trying to implement here, of having relatively
>>> informal online editing followed by a formal call, with a deadline,
>>> to raise any issues about the text that has resulted from the
>>> informal process, and then having a consensus-oriented process to
>>> resolve the issues that have been raised  
> 
> 
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Ashton-Hart
> 
> 
> [with IGC coordinator hat on]
> 
> Perhaps a clarification is needed here.
> 
> This is the _Civil_Society_ Internet Governance Caucus.
> 
> We welcome and value the participation of people from other stakeholder
> groups in general discussions, but the official, formal statements of
> the Caucus need to explicitly represent an aggregated civil society
> perspective.
> 
> It also happens to follow logically from the text of our charter
> that only civil society actors can participate in the formal consensus
> process for the official, formal statements of the Caucus. I'm willing
> to explain this if desired (it's not as immediately clear as I'd like it
> to be, but it does follow logically) -- but I really think that it
> shouldn't be necessary to argue this explicitly.
> 
> The distinction between stakeholder groups is not always totally clear,
> and I would suggest that when participating as a guest in the Caucus
> of another stakeholder group, and in any boundary cases (like when
> someone can be reasonably seen as being part of multiple stakeholder
> categories at the same time), explicit disclosure is an important step.
> One way to practice explicit disclosure is to use a .sig that
> explicitly mentions the employer (or other stakeholder group
> affiliation), possibly as part of a disclaimer that opinions expressed
> are not to be taken as official positions of the employer.
> 
> Greetings,
> Norbert


-------------- 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