CS consensual statement on MSism WAS Re: [governance] Vint Verf tells us the conclusion of the complex IANA transition process

[McTim]

Mawaki,

There are multiple flaws in Geneva based IG processes.  I will
enumerate just a few.

1. They are not actually IG, they are what I call meta-IG or shadow IG.

2. The SGs are artificial and unnecessary except to silo people and
perpetuate the power of governments.

3. The silos are self-perpetuating and carry over into things like
IGFs and Net Mundial.  The notion of representation inherent in those
silos takes us further away from the original notion of individuals
speaking for themselves in shaping Internet policy.

ICANN on the other hand is divided by Supporting Organizations, by
functional area if you will.  These are then sometimes divided by
Various constituencies and SGs, sometimes not.

the cases where they are not are the most BUTOCy I find, and prefer
them to the others.  YMMV.


On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:
> Correction:
>
>  ...qualifying the need for distinction between stakeholder groups *[erase
> --> which are regularly raised] when faced with nominating
> representatives/delegates as a flaw (...) and then *faulting the Geneva-WSIS
> type of MSism for it...
>



-- 
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