[bestbits] [governance] Re: [IRPCoalition] IGF - and the corporatisation scandal

[parminder]

On Wednesday 31 July 2013 05:20 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
> She does not approve, you say
>
> She does not disapprove, you say.

Precisely. And when I voice my concern about a civil society member of 
the MAG, as the oversight body over IGF program etc, taking such a 
neutral/ inactive  position, I am told off by a series of personal 
invectives.  Not done, and I would not take it.

>
> And then you report her responding to your personal attack to the co cos.
>
> It would be interesting to see what the co cos think here.

I am too. Meanwhile if it has escaped the co cos notice, I cut paste the 
relevant portions of my email below...


>
>     You tend to twist people's words in order to score political points,
>     Parminder. I find this tendency, and your general readiness to launch
>     into attack, very disappointing coming from someone (and an
>     organisation) whose views I generally respect. (Anriette)

    I refer these ad hominem comment to the co-coordinators for their
    views and decisions. I will wait for a week, till the 6th of August,
    to be told what views they have on these comments and whether they
    propose any action. If I dont get any response or get a response
    that no action is contemplated, I will proceed to express my views
    on what I think 'Anriette does' on this list in a similarly
    unconstrained manner as she has expressed personalised views about
    me... (Parminder)


(cut paste ends)

parminder









>
> --srs (htc one x)
>
>
>
> On 30 July 2013 10:52:12 PM parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Tuesday 30 July 2013 10:35 PM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:24:45PM +0530, parminder 
>> (parminder at itforchange.net) wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tuesday 30 July 2013 01:33 AM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>> >>> Dear Parminder
>> >>>
>> >>> I did not say there is "nothing wrong with the document".
>> >> Anriette
>> >>
>> >> Your email to which I responded ends as follows
>> >>
>> >> " It seems that people feel the Idonesian organising committee is
>> >> selling influence in turn for sponsorship, but don't really see
>> >> evidence of that beyond the standard 'indirect' influence of
>> >> branding."
>> >> It is absolutely appropriate then for me to say that it is your
>> >> position  that there is nothing wrong with the Indonesian organising
>> >> group's strategy or with the concerned document . I repeat it.
>> >> Please justify how your above comment means anything else.
>> > Parminder,
>> >
>> > No offence intended but I'm utterly unable to understand how
>> > you can interpret Anriette's words the way you do.
>> > I don't see anything in her words you're quoting as
>> > indicating an approval of what the Indonesian group did.
>> Tapani
>>
>> I did not speak of her approving, only of her not disapproving 
>> ('nothing wrong with'), which is what her words clearly amount to. 
>> ...  ... parminder
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130731/9950a07f/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