[governance] Reviving IGC: Merging Bestbits in, IGF Day zero event and other subjects

Wed Jul 17 14:03:02 EDT 2019

Dear Parminder and all,

First of all, I would like to clear up the information about the meeting
Arsene mentioned that we had back at the ICANN meeting. It was just a brief
conversation for us to update each other on the state of the things past
the meeting at RightsCon about general CS convening and not yet about
conducting elections or amending the charter.

I believe I have been nothing but respectful of this list and the
discussions here, the idea of debating charter amendments was brought up by
contribution of members to this very list a few months ago. But instead of
doing an unilateral discussion with Arsene and undermine the consensus
bulding model of IGC, we wanted to hear back from our members if they
consider that such thing is necessary and why.

Your considerations are very important to this process too, Parminder, and
if theres any new point you feel like adding to the agenda in this upcoming
call or if you feel like that this should be an IGC exclusively meeting, we
can all discuss that. About the Day Zero Event, I will check with @Sheetal
Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> the time allocation in order to avoid any
clash as most of us here also happen to attend the JNC meetings. Back in
RightsCon we avoided this clash and I think it should not be too hard this
time.

Best,
Bruna

Le mer. 17 juil. 2019 à 14:33, Mueller, Milton L <milton at gatech.edu> a
écrit :

> What Sheetal says below is correct in my opinion. We are in fact trying to
> merge BB and IGC. We are trying to create a more unified civil society
> presence. We don’t do that by throwing up procedural walls around this
> group. Face facts, IGC needs the people from BB just as much as they need
> us. It is destructive, as Sheetal says, to disregard the process we have
> been going through to bring things back together.  I hope I don’t need to
> remind people why a significant chunk of civil society broke off from IGC
> to begin with - but it looks like certain actors are doing the reminding
> for me.
>
> It is exclusionary to hold elections now, before the newcomers can vote.
> Can someone tell me what positive goal is achieved by doing that? Can
> someone tell me what is lost if we don’t hold elections? Do some people
> like for IGC to be a small and hostile place where they can be a big fish
> in a small pond? I hope not.
>
> Milton L Mueller
> Professor, School of Public Policy
> Georgia Institute of Technology
>
> On Jul 17, 2019, at 14:07, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> I agree that it is easy to join IGC if you sign up to the Charter. It's
> indeed pretty straightforward. However, what I don't understand is the
> disregard for a process that has been ongoing for months, about a large and
> until recently active splinter group of IGC (namely, Bestbits) which has
> since agreed to close and its members who are not already part of IGC 'join
> IGC'. Bestbits was not just a mailing list, it had an active membership, it
> had a functioning website, it had a steering group, it used to coordinate,
> and more. It also had its own membership of the CSCG and used to convene an
> event before the global IGF. And now it is closing. Who knows how many
> people who have been part of that discussion or at least following on
> Bestbits who are not on IGC would like to be part of the IGC elections?
> Whether its semantic or not to call it a 'merger', the point remains that
> this has been a discussion for a few months that should, IMHO, have an
> impact on when to hold the IGC elections. They don't have to, but I think
> it makes sense for them to considering the history of IGC and Bestbits (as
> a splinter group of IGC). Also, I'm not saying this because I want to run
> for any elections necessarily, I've only ever been interested a discussion
> towards a more impactful and coordinated civil society in this space. It
> just seems to make sense not to disregard that Bestbits discussion and to
> take decisions with the Bestbits discussion in mind (again, because of the
> history of the connection between Bestbits and IGC).
>
> I've looked at the IGC Charter and it says "Voting process: Each person
> who is subscribed to the list at least two (2) months before the election
> will be given a voter account".
>
> So, even if Bestbits members who are not part of IGC joined then they
> couldn't vote right away. Shouldn't we wait for 2-3 months? If there is a
> time sensitive reason not to, that would be good to discuss.
>
> For clarity, revising the IGC charter was only ever an idea, its not been
> agreed to anywhere by anyone. It's just something to discuss, further down
> the line. Perhaps.
>
> Best
> Sheetal
>
> On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 12:40, Nnenna Nwakanma <governance at lists.riseup.net>
> wrote:
>
>> I think we can pull off an IGC elections by  Berlin IGF.
>> Joining the IGC from BB  should not be  "a process".
>>
>> Once an individual decides that it is worth it.. it only takes a click to
>> accept the charter and be added to the mailing list.
>>
>> My 2 cents
>>
>> Nnenna
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 11:36 AM Suresh Ramasubramanian <
>> suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Much to my surprise I agree with Parminder.  If Bestbits is to be wound
>>> up, so be it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> After which, those from Bestbits who wish to caucus in the IGC please
>>> subscribe to the list and do so.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *<governance-request at lists.riseup.net> on behalf of parminder <
>>> parminder at itforchange.net>
>>> *Reply to: *parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>> *Date: *Wednesday, 17 July 2019 at 4:50 pm
>>> *To: *Arsène Tungali <arsenebaguma at gmail.com>, Sheetal Kumar <
>>> sheetal at gp-digital.org>
>>> *Cc: *"ian.peter at ianpeter.com" <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>, "Salanieta T.
>>> Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>, governance <
>>> governance at lists.riseup.net>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [governance] Reviving IGC: Merging Bestbits in, IGF Day
>>> zero event and other subjects
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17/07/19 3:25 PM, Arsène Tungali wrote:
>>>
>>> Good point, Sheetal and I agree with you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I had briefly discussed the election issue with Bruna during the last
>>>
>>> ICANN meeting and we agreed that the best time to conduct co-co
>>>
>>> elections is right after the merger step is completed, the new charter
>>>
>>> has been adopted and we have a unified list. I am sure Bruna was
>>>
>>> planning to report this to the list at some point, but here you are.
>>>
>>> Arsene
>>>
>>> I am not sure what you mean about a unified list...
>>>
>>> There is a clear, and rather easy, way to join the IGC, and it is up to
>>> to those in Bestbits and not already in IGC to take that route if they want
>>> to. Meanwhile we do welcome all civil society members adhering to iGC's
>>> charter (rather than insisting for, unclear and unstated reasons, to modify
>>> it).
>>>
>>> And there is really no merger involved here, even if people loosely use
>>> that language .
>>>
>>> I remain astonished about the repeated talk about a new IGC charter,
>>> especially as an already decided thing! What exactly are you talking about.
>>>
>>> And I am further pained for you, being still perhaps an IGC
>>> co-coordinator, not at all responding to my clear email about how this
>>> elist is the primary work place for the IGC, and also an ex-coordinator's
>>> assent tp the sentiment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would suggest we all plan to attend the call and agree on next steps.
>>>
>>> You can make whatever calls and agree on whatever steps you have you may
>>> wish to -- that is no part of IGC's procedure, and would have no meaning or
>>> consequence for it.
>>>
>>> regards
>>>
>>> parminder
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Arsene
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2019-07-17 11:44 UTC+02:00, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> <sheetal at gp-digital.org>:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While the closure of Bestbits is an internal matter for Bestbits, we have
>>>
>>> agreed for it to be closed and so I'd say any IGC conversations need to
>>>
>>> take that into account. We're at that point where the closure has been
>>>
>>> agreed but there are still people on Bestbits who are not on IGC but likely
>>>
>>> will sign up to be part of the discussions soon.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As such, shouldn't we wait for those from Bestbits who want to join to join
>>>
>>> and we can then get the IGC coordinator elections going? The call to agree
>>>
>>> next steps and make sure everyone is on the same page is going to be w/c
>>>
>>> August 5.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Sheetal
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 at 06:29, ian.peter at ianpeter.com
>>>
>>> <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bruna,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On a more substantive matter -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you also advise us on how progress is going as regards getting the
>>>
>>> IGC
>>>
>>> Coordinator elections (which were due last January) underway? On June 26
>>>
>>> you advised the list that you. would be talking to Arsene and would get
>>>
>>> back to the list ASAP.  Do you have an update?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ian Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------ Original Message ------
>>>
>>> From: "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <governance at lists.riseup.net> <governance at lists.riseup.net>
>>>
>>> To: "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>>
>>> Cc: "governance" <governance at lists.riseup.net> <governance at lists.riseup.net>
>>>
>>> Sent: 17/07/2019 2:14:13 PM
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Reviving IGC: Merging Bestbits in, IGF Day zero
>>>
>>> event and other subjects
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Agree with Parminder.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 17 Jul 2019, 5:11 am parminder, <parminder at itforchange.net> <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> HI Bruna/ All
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Good morning to all!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bestbits' merging into the IGC is their internal matter.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As for a day zero event at the IGF for the IGC, when do you plan it...
>>>
>>> Just Net Coalition has an event post lunch on day zero, and please
>>>
>>> ensure
>>>
>>> that these do not clash. Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While as a secondary or adjunct method call based discussions can be
>>>
>>> done
>>>
>>> among however wishes to do so, the charter clearly says that the main
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> authoritative space of IGC's work will be this e-list, which I request
>>>
>>> everyone's attention to.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> thanks and best regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> parminder
>>>
>>> On 17/07/19 7:32 AM, Bruna Martins dos Santos (via
>>>
>>>
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Programme Lead | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
> PGP ID: E592EFBBEAB1CF31  | PGP Fingerprint: F5D5 114D 173B E9E2 0603
> DD7F E592 EFBB EAB1 CF31|
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net
> <igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>>
> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>
> ---
> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>

-- 
*Bruna Martins dos Santos *

Skype ID: bruna.martinsantos
@boomartins
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20190717/bd42fcdb/attachment.htm>