[governance] DMP} Proposed letter on role of Brazil liaisons

[Mawaki Chango]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
>
> > An announcement from Brazil about the meeting is expected any time
> > now.  Please do not send any letter until the Brazilian government's
> > plans are clear.
>
> [with IGC coordinator hat on]
>
> ACK.
>
> I'm pretty sure that even if we go forward as quickly as reasonably
> possible with resolving that opposition "on principle" against the
> appointment of four civil society liaisons through an informal
> in-person process in Bali, that resolution process will in any case
> not be complete before we have news from the Brazilian government.
>

+1
This is a process and will take a couple days. Let's not keep on holding
everything back, including decision-making processes, till the last minute
or the lightest shade of gray be illuminated.

m.


>
> Greetings,
> Norbert
>
>
> > On Nov 14, 2013, at 7:54 PM, Norbert Bollow wrote:
> >
> > > [with IGC coordinator hat on]
> > >
> > > Is there any way for this opposition "on principle" to be reconciled
> > > with the intention behind to proposed letter on the role of the
> > > liaisons?
> > >
> > > If not, full consensus will clearly not be possible on this matter,
> > > and it may be appropriate to use the rough consensus process.
> > >
> > > There was very strong support for what this letter has been
> > > proposed to express among the IGC members who participated in
> > > person in the relevant discussions in Bali.
> > >
> > > The rough consensus process which is explicitly allowed by the IGC
> > > Charter could be implemented for example by means of using online
> > > polling software to determine whether there is an overwhelming
> > > majority of IGC members in support of such a letter. According to
> > > the Charter, such a rough consensus poll has to run at least 48
> > > hours, then the coordinators would jointly decide to interpret the
> > > result as "rough consensus" or not. (That is of course a decision
> > > that can be appealed if desired.)
> > >
> > > But we should certainly discuss the matter first.
> > >
> > > Greetings,
> > > Norbert
> > >
> > >
> > > Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I will oppose this on principle as drawing any sort of artificial
> > >> distinction between the technical community and civil society is
> > >> counterproductive in the long run.
> > >>
> > >> --srs (iPad)
> > >>
> > >>> On 14-Nov-2013, at 15:29, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On 14/11/13 12:00, parminder wrote:
> > >>>>>> Once again, as suggested by Matthew, I do believe a formal
> > >>>>>> letter nominating and explaining our role as liasons, and not
> > >>>>>> representatives, for International Civil Society for
> > >>>>>> information regarding the Summit will be good to legitimate
> > >>>>>> and help our job here.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> A formal letter naming our liaisons and making it clear that
> > >>>>> global civil society would want to use this mechanism to
> > >>>>> coordinate its role in the proposed Brazil meeting and not go
> > >>>>> through 1net or any other tehcnical community led interface is
> > >>>>> of the highest priority at this stage. Dont want to get into
> > >>>>> I-told-you-so mode, but I have been insisting that we did that
> > >>>>> first and in clear terms since our earliest meetings in Bali. If
> > >>>>> we have got such a communication through in clear terms, maybe
> > >>>>> our four reps would have been there at the above meeting. At
> > >>>>> least if they werent invited we could have protested...
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Draft letter is here: http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/brazil-reps
> > >>>
> > >>> Looks good to me.
> > >>>
> > >>> Greetings,
> > >>> Norbert
> > >
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20131114/612ac53c/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