[governance] CSTD WG on Enhanced Cooperation : Update

[McTim]

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 9:44 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> On Friday 15 March 2013 06:30 PM, McTim wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 1:55 AM, parminder<parminder at itforchange.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>
>
> We are not advocating anything, That is the process - take it or leave it.


It's the take it or leave ot-ness that is alien to the traditional
Internet Governance processes.


> And I note that you havent left it - did you not offer to be selected by the
> IGC nomcom to be CS representative (representative as in representivity) on
> the MAG, and your name was actually forwarded by the nomcom ?
>
>> The T&A Community is a separate grouping because they were (r)ejected
>> by folks in CS at WSIS, so I don't see how we can complain they are
>> their own SG when we won't tolerate them in our SG!
>
>
> You identify yourself above as technical community (if you dont I am still
> ready to go by your self identification, but just be clear and dont confuse
> people here) ..... have you been ejected from civil society. You have been
> one of the most active participants in drafting CS positions here, and as
> above offered yourself for, and was selected by the group as, CS nominee for
> MAG.... So, McTim, what exactly are you talking about.....

I for one feel that the T&A folks ARE CS, but I've posited this
before, and found much disagreement.

>
> And BTW, at WSIS ISOC registered itself as private sector when the option
> was given to it to choose between CS and private sector as the too only
> available options. So, again not sure what are you talking about ISOC having
> been ejected by folks in CS at WSIS...

Did I say ISOC had been ejected?  I was told (and have experienced
first hand on this list over many years that ISOC and the rest of the
Technical Community aren't "real" CS, they are more in-line with Trade
Associations, hence they were not considered CS @WSIS.

As MG's actions have pointed out, we can have one foot in each camp.
I think it hubristic of IGC to think they can sway who gets appointed
by other SGs however.


-- 
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