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

[Norbert Bollow]

On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:50:53 +0000
Mawaki Chango <kichango at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, then the question is how do we scale up? Individuals directly
> speaking for themselves can only work well in settings up to certain
> size. I believe it is the challenge of scaling up (say, to hundreds
> of millions of individual stakeholders, the population size of
> multiple nation-states)

I think that we need to distinguish between

(a) “thinkers” who offer analysis, solution proposals, etc.

and

(b) “grass-roots voices” who speak to the concerns, needs, desires,
etc. of people on the ground.

In regard to 'a', I seriously doubt that a better process principle is
possible than the principle of individuals directly speaking for
themselves, and consequently analysis and proposals being evaluated on
the basis of their substantive merits (as opposed to them being
evaluated on the basis of how much political power has been organized
in support of each position.) The good news is that “thinkers” are good
at analyzing and categorizing etc, so when their number increases,
they're able to creatively self-organize in ways that address the
scaling problem, so if it is demanded of the “thinkers” to somehow
reduce the number of proposals for any given issue to a manageable
number, they can do it. (Not all have sufficiently compatible
viewpoints that they'll be able to productively collaborate, but if the
overall governance system ensures that proposals which are not based on
collaboration will only rarely be able to compete with proposals based
on significant collaboration, there is IMO nothing to worry about.)  

In regard to 'b', as far as I can see the challenges are in getting
enough people (who can legitimately and credibly speak to these
perspectives) to come and speak in the first place, and in getting
everyone else to listen to them (as opposed to the well-connected
insiders recommending each other for being on yet another panel.)
I honestly see no scaling problem in regard to 'b'. Quite the opposite.

In my view, the main challenge is not at all about scaling. It is about
decision making processes for choosing among competing views, and
specifically the challenge is about ensuring that in regard to
decisions which concern or affect public policy matters, those
decisions are made with appropriate democratic accountability (which
has two aspects, on one hand accountability to every person
individually in regard to the principles which are recognized as human
rights, and then a broader collective accountability which must be
based on the principle “one person, one vote.”)

Greetings,
Norbert

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