[governance] Preliminary List of Nominees for the 2013 MAG - REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION

[parminder]

Hi Bill

On Thursday 17 January 2013 03:10 PM, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Parminder
>
> On Jan 17, 2013, at 4:21 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net 
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> wrote:
>
>>> In either scenario, I would think Adam's solution is a sensible way 
>>> to get this done promptly and focus the noncom's effort on what 
>>> really needs doing.
>>
>> I do however find it rather odd that an existing IGC nominated MAG 
>> member should insist that either the matter of recertifying  not be 
>> taken up at all, or that noncom simple issues a blanket endorsement 
>> without at all going into the merit of the case, that too without 
>> appending any disclaimer :).
>
> And I find it rather odd that you would make this claim when a) in the 
> very next sentence of my message I refer to discussions we are having 
> in the MAG;

I did not understand. What do any discussions in the MAG have to do with 
my request that all existing members also be considered for 
renomination? (By the way, what discussions are you having in the MAG?)

> b) in another message sent to you and the list seven minutes later I 
> ask you what you thought was controversial about our informal MAG 
> meeting in Baku

I will related my views on this in rather details very soon.. watch this 
space :)
> and note that we on the MAG have sort of deferred to Izumi's reporting 
> but could do something else if people wanted;

That is very fine.. I have no problem with it. Generally I do seek 
better and closer interactions. Many have said the same thing about out 
MAG reps over the years on the IGC list...

> and c) the composition of the MAG CS contingent has been discussed in 
> the thread and is hardly a secret.

Yes, everyone knows it. That still makes it odd for an extant member to 
repeated assert that extant members should not recertified.

>   I also find it ironic given the high standards of disclosure 
> demonstrated when you were telling the IGC to support the Indian 
> government's CIRP proposal without mentioning your role in it, and so 
> on. :-)
>
> Games aside, I remain curious about your insistence the nomcom spend 
> time on an extra procedure that the Secretariat has made clear is 
> unnecessary,

Secretariat seems to think so... but not the real decision maker - the 
UNDESA. right!

> particularly when the discussion here was about the tight time frame 
> and urgent need to complete the process.

It should take a few minutes only. I expect everyone to be renominated, 
maybe with a short discussion about some being more interactive than 
others, but maybe the nomcom will also observe that they expect/ request 
continued or greater interaction with IGC... That is all.

>   What purpose would it serve?

The biggest purposes of all - accountability.... Why are so giving it 
such a short shrift.

>  I don't really care much either way and would of course roll with 
> whatever IGC members have consensus on, but it seems like silly 
> bureaucracy to me.

For a nominating group to reassess an earlier nominated candidate is 
'silly bureaucracy' for you ! That surprises me. I really dont where are 
you coming from.

Would it look rather less silly if at some time an IGC nomcom 
conspicuously refused to renominate an extant MAG member, while 
renominating all others, because it were a widely held belief that, 
since the earleir nomination, the concerned member had clearly conducted 
him/her-self in a manner that maked him/her not worthy of an IGC 
nomination. Is such a situation in your view entirely inconceivable?

There are countries that have right-to-recall provisions. India has them 
now in some local bodies. And you are against a re-assessment even when 
there is clearly a fresh appointment involved.

parminder

>  [Disclaimer: I am on the MAG, nominated by IGC and APC]
>
> Cheers
>
> Bill
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130118/203f166b/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