[governance] Perspectives (was Re: Fwd: And Now the Second Battle of the Internet)

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

What gets interesting is where two people who self identify with much the same label can be moderates with a technical and policy dual background, hardcore ideologues and possibly shades in between these two extremes. 

Self identification becomes quite problematic in this case because the other person's perceptions still come into play to separate out different shades from any particular ideological spectrum. 

--srs

-------- Original message --------
From: Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> 
Date: 06/17/2013  5:46 PM  (GMT+05:30) 
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org 
Subject: Re: [governance] Perspectives (was Re: Fwd: And Now the Second Battle of the Internet) 
 
Chaitanya Dhareshwar <chaitanyabd at gmail.com> wrote:

> So for example (for clarity, mainly for me) I may say I'm a third
> worlder (from India) as well as a third worldist (trying to focus on
> improving the developing nations overall) and this would be noted on
> the wiki? So that someone who understands that viewpoint would be
> able to sympathize/'get' my point better, and someone who does not
> get that viewpoint would be perhaps able to reconcile differences and
> ask questions accordingly?

Yes, exactly... and since it'd be you who enters the term “third
worldist” into the wiki as a descriptive term for yourself, together
with the explanation “trying to focus on improving the developing
nations overall”, it would be clear to all that it is acceptable, and
not in any way unfriendly, to refer to that perspective and objective as
“third worldist”.

Greetings,
Norbert

> On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 2:47 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> 
> > Chaitanya Dhareshwar <chaitanyabd at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > "Mapping"? More detail please Nobert, there's newbies (like me)
> > > here so not everyone may understand the technical terms... :)
> >
> > Here's a quick attempt at explaining in somewhat more detail what I
> > meant:
> >
> > Since a significant aspect of what has recently caused heated words
> > and hostility on this list seems to have been (a) misunderstandings
> > and invalid assumptions about viewpoint of other participants, and
> > (b) references to other participants' viewpoints that were
> > understood by others to be derogatory and/or otherwise offensive, I
> > propose that it would be helpful to increase our mutual
> > understanding of what our various viewpoints (I use this term
> > broadly in this email, it is intended to include what I have
> > previously referred to as “perspectives” and “interests”) are, e.g.
> > by means of an online wiki that documents many of them.
> >
> > As mentioned recently, Sala and I have been discussing setting up a
> > wiki for the IGC which would give everyone with an igcaucus.org
> > account a personal homepage in relation to the IGC.
> >
> > I might use that to note e.g. that my viewpoint is broadly a “social
> > liberal” one (this might be linked to a wiki page that briefly
> > explains what that means in the context of Internet governance). I
> > might add that my perspective is significantly shaped by having a
> > technical background, by living in a small European country which
> > is not part of the EU and which is going through uncomfortable
> > experiences of being put under severe pressure by more powerful
> > countries, and by having a Kenyan friend who is a pastor among poor
> > people in Kenya.
> >
> > The main part of the “mapping” exercise would be a wiki page that
> > lists the various broad categories of viewpoints and links to the
> > IGC wiki homepages of those who have chosen to self-identify with
> > one of them.
> >
> > The benefits of such a “map of viewpoints” would include
> > - making it easier to refer to viewpoints of IGC participants
> > without risk of unintendedly sounding derogatory (after all if I
> > have endorsed a particular label as referring to a kind of
> > viewpoint that I share, it shouldn't be viewed as offensive when
> > that label is then used in reference to the kind of views that I
> > have been advocating.)
> > - making it reasonably easy to get some background understanding
> >   on arguments presented by another IGC participant - such
> > background understanding can be provided e.g. by links to
> > theoretical treatises on particular viewpoints, by explaining the
> > particular perspectives and experiences that have significantly
> > contributed to shaping a particular viewpoint, etc.
> > - documenting the breadth of viewpoints represented in IGC
> >
> > Of course it is possible that maybe multiple people all choose to
> > self-identify in the same way, even while fundamentally disagreeing
> > with each other. Such disagreements could also be documented in a
> > “map of civil society viewpoints and perspectives”.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Norbert


-- 
Recommendations for effective and constructive participation in IGC:
1. Respond to the content of assertions and arguments, not to the person
2. Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130617/96d86406/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