[governance] Re: [bestbits] Three NETmundial submissions launched for endorsement at bestbits.net

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

People routinely wear multiple hats and fixed stakeholder roles is an old myth.

Multistakeholderism is functionally equivalent to participative democracy, and only demands that people asking for a stake are expected to contribute towards achieving a common set of tasks and goals.

Full on democracy without any mention of multistakeholderism is where everybody has a vote, but where votes get aggregated in the hands of elected representatives, who then exercise their right to function in whatever role they are elected to. 

 Whether it be the co co of this caucus or the president of a country.  No others get to be co co or president, we trust whoever the majority elects to perform their duties responsibly (and of course are, in an informed democracy, proactive in calling out bad decisions, or maybe changing our votes the next time elections come around)

Rather less hands on than multistakeholderism, though .. And quite inappropriate in the context that you want it.

--srs (iPad)

> On 06-Mar-2014, at 5:27, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I see, so in your world democracy (however flawed), is to be replaced by Multistakeholderism where there is no (evident) transparency (T) or accountability (A) for the inputs into the stakeholder processes, no (evident) T or A for the outputs of the stakeholder processes  and the stakeholders themselves are subject to no effective T or A since they are some sort of (interglalactic?) shapeshifters errr… those with “role flexibilities”.
>  
> Have I missed something here?
>  
> This may work for a Wizard of Oz space like 1Net where even as the curtain gets repeatedly bunched up revealing the (“non-existent”—we have it on the highest possible authority—trust us) wizard pulling the strings and T & A appears to consist of repeated choruses of “trust them it will get better” by a fawning self-selected “Steering Committee”, but surely in our world we might expect something with a slightly higher reality component.
>  
> M
>  
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Malcolm
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 4:21 AM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder
> Cc: &lt,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt,
> Subject: Re: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Three NETmundial submissions launched for endorsement at bestbits.net
>  
> On 5 Mar 2014, at 7:49 pm, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> So, request a clear response - do you mean parity in decision making about public policies between gov and non gov actors.... And this is not a petty point... Half of the time of the WGEC got taken on this kind of discussion. This is the single most important point today, if we can clarify nd possibly agree on this point - rest is not too difficult... Lets accept what is the key point, and not skirt it...
>  
> Different people who contributed to the submission, even if they all endorse the final result, will probably give you different answers to that question.  I'm not sure that anyone is interested in what my personal answer is because I'm just an individual, but I would say no I do not accept as a general proposition that parity in decision making is appropriate, which is why I personally objected to that language being used.
>  
> For some issues, it will be appropriate that the stakeholders act as equals in the decision making process (to the extent that there is a "decision" at all).  In other areas, it won't be appropriate and may be more appropriate that although all stakeholders are involved, one of them will legitimately take a bigger role than the others.  For example governments may take a leading role in transnational human rights disputes, the technical community may do so in developing spam filtering standards, civil society may do so in developing human rights based principles for judging government surveillance practices, and even the private sector may do so, say in setting prices for the trading of IPv4 addresses.
>  
> This also implies that the appropriate mechanism of governance may differ in each case, eg. laws, standards, markets.  The above all follows naturally if you accept that there are no fixed stakeholder roles, because the appropriate roles will differ depending on the circumstances.
> 
> 
> BTW, the German government has the following to say in its submission to NetMundial
> 
> ...
> 
> Do you for instance agree to the above formulation, or NOT...
>  
> Nope, don't agree with the German government's formulation because it maintains the fallacy of fixed stakeholder roles.
>  
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
>  
> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended to enable encryption at your end. For instructions, see http://jere.my/l/pgp.
>  
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140306/88960e7b/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