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

[parminder]

On Friday 20 September 2013 02:06 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
> Nothing personal on my  part... The 1500 +/- members of the Community
> Informatics community(s) were (as indicated by  the various comments) rather
> disappointed (even angry) at being excluded from having a voice in the T/A
> community.
>
> For them  (i.e. those concerned with the grassroots use of ICTs) the model
> evidently wasn't working.
>
> http://vancouvercommunity.net/lists/arc/ciresearchers (check out Feb.  -
> March of 2013).
>
> (BTW I'ld be very interested to know the size, composition and activity of
> the networks that others involved in these CS and other discussions are
> reporting back to...

I have been meaning to raise this issue.... The UN document announcing 
the formation of MAG says that MAG members "are expected to have 
extensive linkages with their respective stakeholder groups". No 
personal aspersions intended, but I dont think that at least some of the 
chosen members indeed have such linkages, or take this direction 
seriously during their tenure in MAG.

I would like all self-nominations and other forms of nominations for MAG 
members, that focusses on this particular point, to be available 
publicly on the MAG website, so that the 'IGF community' (?) can know 
who indeed has such linkages and feed them as the role of MAG members is 
to do.

I think all nominations, successful or not, should be put up. Once we 
step into such public and political arenas we shouldnt be too shy of 
such things. But in any case nomination forms - and I repeat, with a 
clear column on 'linkages aspect' - of those who do eventually get 
nominated to the MAG should be put out publicly.... We must know which 
groups they are (extensively) linked to.

Any appetite in the IGF to initiate such a request?

parminder



>
> M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 2:52 PM
> To: IGC
> Subject: Re: [governance] stakeholder categories (was Re: NSA sabotage of
> Internet security standards...)
>
> Hi,
>
> Is this all about a personal axe to grind.
>
> On an issue regarding how the model works, or doesn't work?
>
> avri
>
> On 19 Sep 2013, at 14:29, McTim wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 12:30 PM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>> McTim,
>>>
>>> As you know what you say below is compketely untrue and you should be
>>> ashamed for your insinuation.
>>
>> I didn't "say" anything, merely posed a question.  I also insinuated
>> nothing at all.
>>
>> It is clear that they didn't see you as being part of T&A, which isn't
>> right IMO, but that is what you get when you create silos.
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
>> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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 --------------
____________________________________________________________
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