[governance] Just Net Coalition

[David Sullivan]

On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 3:37 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
wrote:

>
> On Wednesday 25 June 2014 02:08 AM, David Sullivan wrote:
>
> Hi all - does anyone know if the Just Net Coalition has a public list of
> members yet? I've noted with interest multiple recent submissions and
> statements on the JNC website <http://justnetcoalition.org/>, but it's
> somewhat hard to fully appreciate these documents when the membership they
> represent appears somewhat ambiguously related to a list of attendees from
> a February meeting.
>
>
> Dear David
>
> Thanks for your interest in the Just Net Coalition, and its membership.
> The following facts may be useful to you in this regard.
>
> The attendees of the mentioned Feb meeting, listed on the Coalition's
> website <http://justnetcoalition.org/> launched the coalition and adopted
> its principles, which are contained in the Delhi Declaration
> <http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration>. Both the principles and
> the organisational issues, processes etc were evolved at the meeting
> through break out groups and latter adoption of their outputs by consensus
> at the plenary. Even the need or otherwise for such a coalition and the
> name of the coalition were respectively discussed, and adopted at the
> meeting, by full consensus.
>
> Therefore there is a good basis to consider the list of attendees of the
> Feb meeting prima facie as the initial list of members of the Coalition. In
> this background, in general, you and others need to feel no ambiguity about
> Coalition membership and the basis of its statements and positions.
>
> Further, all the submissions and statements that you would have seen are
> adopted by a formal consensus process, with discussion time, 48 hours call,
> and all that, on an elist that contains all the attendees of the Feb
> meeting plus all those who were invited and could not attend for some
> reason. While these additional people can, to that extent, be considered as
> a part of the consensus process for making Just Net Coalition (JNC)
> statements, we have in fact been conservative and not listed them as
> members of JNC anywhere.
>
> In the same spirit of a conservative approach and full due diligence, we
> have asked all attendees and invitees of the Feb workshop to reconfirm
> their membership of the Just Net Coalition, which involves an agreement
> with the Delhi Declaration <http://justnetcoalition.org/delhi-declaration>.
>  As Norbert mentions, there has been some delay in this work, however it
> is in its final phase right now. As per current information we have
> precisely 3 people who have not re-confirmed membership, all three saying
> that they agree with the principles but do not have organisational
> clearance. There are 3-4 others with whom we are still in communication
> with regard to their internal organisational processes to ok joining such a
> coalition. Overall there are considerably more number of organisations and
> individuals that have confirmed membership than are at present listed on
> the JNC website, indicated as attendees of the Feb meeting. The full list
> should be up on the website within a week.
>
> We are happy to respond to any other query about the Coalition. In fact,
> we plan to provide a 'your right to know' link on Coalition's web page
> where all organisational, including financial information, will be
> provided. The same page will welcome anyone who wants any further
> information about the Coalition, providing an email link, with a guaranteed
> response within 2 weeks.
>
>  Regards
>  parminder
>

Thanks Parminder - this is very helpful context. The reason why I queried
the IGC list about this issue was that I could not find any information on
the JNC website to this effect, and although I subscribed to the newsletter
had not received any mailings.

I know that ironing out the operational details of getting organizational
signoffs for coalition work can be challenging and takes time. However,
those reviewing JNC submissions or reading statements who do not subscribe
to the IGC, Best Bits, or other open IG e-lists could find this confusing.
Adding a short paragraph of interim boilerplate might help until the
membership is resolved and made public.

> Thanks,
>  David
>
>  --
> David Sullivan
> Policy and Communications Director
> Global Network Initiative <http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org>
> Office: +1 202 741 5048
> Mobile: +1 646 595 5373
> @David_MSullivan <https://twitter.com/David_MSullivan>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
David Sullivan
Policy and Communications Director
Global Network Initiative <http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org>
Office: +1 202 741 5048
Mobile: +1 646 595 5373
@David_MSullivan <https://twitter.com/David_MSullivan>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140630/c3462cee/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