[governance] Vint Verf tells us the conclusion of the complex IANA transition process

[parminder]

On Saturday 26 July 2014 08:18 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Snip
> Whenever I need a definition, I use:
>
>
> The study and practice of forms of participatory democracy that allow
> for all those who have a stake and who have the inclination, to
> participate on equal footing in the deliberation of issues and the
> recommendation of solutions. While final decisions and implementation
> may be assigned to a single stakeholder group, these decision makers are
> always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and
> the implementations.


The definition above says that the 'equal footing' part is only for 
participation in deliberation of issues and giving (I understand, 
non-binding) recommendations of solutions. And that it does not apply to 
actual decision making and implementation. However, this is not how the 
term 'equal footing' is employed in the current MS discourse and the 
MSist text that is sought to pushed into global documents, including at 
NetMundial, CSTD WGs, and almost everywhere else. (I can provide any 
number of proofs to support this assertion.) There is obviously a world 
of difference between 'equal footing' for deliberations and rec giving, 
on one hand, and public policy decision making and implementation, on 
the other.

But lets not crib over the past. If this is the way Avri looks at MS 
processes, and I see that Mawaki has noted the definition with some 
enthusiasm, can we attempt what could be a 'grand reconciliation' :) ... 
Between the so called MSist on one hand and those who profess global 
democratic governance (called MLists by detractors), which division I 
understand has almost universally been cited as the key factor causing 
rifts in the IG related civil society, and making its contribution far 
less effective than it could have been. A worthy cause to attempt, 
anyone would say.

I propose that the IGC adopts the following text by consensus.

"With democratic multistakeholder processes we mean an equal footing 
only for means and forums of deliberations and possible recommendation 
(non binding) giving. The term 'equal footing' does not extent to 
decision making and implementation."

Now, if people want to keep the issue of technical standards related and 
other decisions out of such a formulation (as I would bec it admits of a 
different dynamics) we can make clear that we are taking of public 
policy decision  making, something which in fact is clear and given when 
we begin to discuss democracy , which is the present context. but, still 
can make it explicit, if only to avoid getting into that customary mess 
of a policy processes related discussions being responded to with a 
technical decisions related comment(s). So, maybe

"With democratic multistakeholder processes for public policies 
development we mean an equal footing only for means and forums  of 
deliberations and possible recommendation making (non binding) . The 
term 'equal footing' does not extent to decision making and implementation."

The NEt Mundial document recommended that the ideas and concepts related 
to democratic MS processes be discussed further and clarified. By 
attempting the above, we will only be taking forward the work of NetMundial.

parminder



>
> It is just hard to live up to, and each of the words in the definition
> need to be defined as well.  But it is my working definition.
>
> avri
> m17m.org
>


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