[governance] CSTD WG on Enhanced Cooperation : Update

[McTim]

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> Comment below
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:00 PM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:55 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> I think this is a serious matter. Let me argue why. This group, and perhaps
>>> much of IG civil society, has been rather focussed on multistakeholderism as
>>> a new participatory form of democracy (hopefully!). Now, it is easy to say
>>> that civil society, business and technical comunity should be at the policy
>>> making table or at least involved substantially. But the immediate question
>>> then is; who among these groups should be allowed in? Representivity
>>> therefore is the most key issue that participatory democracy and
>>> multistakeholderism (MSism) must constantly deal with. Since it is the
>>> contention of this movement that elections  *do not exhaust" public
>>> representation, and that they need to be complemented by other forms, it
>>> must show how it adds to public representativity and, rather, does not take
>>> away from it.
>>>
>>> This is the key legitimacy question for MSism and I invite the numerous
>>> theoreticians and practitioners of MSism in this group to engage with the
>>> episode that Michael has been involved in as below in light of this key
>>> legitimacy question fro MSism - how do we select representatives, when
>>> indeed the occasion comes that not everyone can be seated at the table, not
>>> even everyone who turns up.
>>
>> I think it ironic that in the technical community processes I'm
>> involved in everyone who shows up "gets a seat at the table", while in
>> the UN processes that are allegedly MS, there is an insistence on
>> "representivity" by CS advocates.
>>
>> The T&A Community is a separate grouping because they were (r)ejected
>> by folks in CS at WSIS,
>
>
> As one of the people coordinating this caucus at the time - no they weren't

Is it not the case that (on this list specifically) the consensus has
been that the T&A are NOT CS proper?

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

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