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

[Mawaki Chango]

Would that have made more sense had I said that in this following way?
If one adopts the perspective of MSism as in "the original notion of
individuals
speaking for themselves in shaping Internet policy," then a scaling problem
arises at some point within that perspective? Because that was my starting
point. In a different perspective, that problem may go away, indeed may not
even exist.

However, I note that while saying scaling is not at all a problem in case
'b', you're still considering the number of people behind a solution path
("getting enough people") and still back at it ("one person, one vote")
even after considering some other qualitative ways of categorizing problems
and assessing solutions (weighing? "competing views"). Scaling will sooner
or later be a challenge or a relevant question (how to account for a
greater vis-a-vis a lesser number or how great is a greater number) in any
of the above two quantitative measurement means you alluded to in the
operationalization of 'b' as long as there's no prescriptive limit to the
number of people who can participate. Even a seemingly simple equation such
as "one person, one vote" is not always easy to implement in a
transnational, global online context. Not to mention that many people take
issue with that being the golden rule of participation when it comes to
decision-making for managing a large socio-technical infrastructure such as
the internet (but I guess that is a meta-level issue for another day.)

Mawaki


On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 18:50:53 +0000
>

<snip>


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

<snip>


> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140731/38196de9/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