[governance] stakeholder categories (was Re: NSA sabotage of Internet security standards...)

[McTim]

 Norbert,


On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

<SNIP>


>
> The broad definitions of “civil society” do not result in “civil
> society” being a category with useful meaning. If multistakeholder
> processes are based on badly defined stakeholder categories, then I'm
> sure that at least in the long run, no governance structure that relies
> on such processes can be viable.
>


I'm not sure that stakeholder categories are even neccesary.  We don't have
them in the RIR world nor in the IETF, the two most often cited examples of
IG processes that work well!



-- 
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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130917/e72e8251/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