[governance] The proposal for closing Bestbits and merging with IGC + next steps (was "Follow-on from survey on the future of Bestbits: next steps")

Thu Jun 13 23:26:21 EDT 2019

Hey Farzaneh,

Hope you are well and in good health. There is a way under the charter to
debate with the view of calling a consensus if we have done since inception
of the IGC. The co-coordinators lead this process.

Merely tossing it on the list and getting a few comments. Also draft texts
are placed in any convenient platform (we used to use an etherpad, but
something that shows tracked input from the IGC community) where the draft
is then put to the IGC for consensus before the IGC position is taken as a
statement or into negotiations. Minority views can also be mentioned.

The process is only to preserve accountability and collaboration,
transparency because of the multifaceted views within the community.

When the initial discussions of merger came up last year, I noted that it
had Best Bits copied in and raised the same procedural concerns.

At the end of the day, speaking as a former IGC co-cordinator, it is
respectfully the coordinators who need to coordinate and our role as
members is to as you pointed out contribute.

Once the IGC has a strategic plan, in place, it can identify organisations
who are already doing work in key spaces eg. Dynamic Coalition on Human
Rights or organisations.

Personally, the Charter is not broken.amd works perfectly, it's just that
members need to follow it and if they have tested it, and find needs
reviewing and amending then do so. Fixing it to solve the problem will be
like taking mongoose to a country that does not have them to eat chickens
only to discover, the mongoose are now eating chicken.

Personally, I love your energy and we need energy from every member within
the community to be productive in an open, collaborative and transparent
manner. I also forgot to thank you for keeping us posted on the
Christchurch call. Hopefully Keith who lurks on this page is reading this
:). Glad that Jordan is leading Internet NZ and hopefully, Arden can place
more prominence on their Net Hui (IGF) in NZ.

P.S feel free to add me on wattsapp and we can.discuss offline so am not
repeating myself on the list.My cell is +447597516694

On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, 3:19 am farzaneh badii, <farzaneh.badii at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Sala
>
> We have been extensively debating this since December 2018. Have held 3
> online meetings and one in person meeting. Had a survey, shared with IGC as
> well. As you say BestBits members are IGC members anyway. This was about
> merging Bestbits with IGC. coordination to come to this conclusion took
> place with both IGC and BestBits members.
> Is there a requirement to take a poll? Polling is actually an imperfect
> way to gauge consensus. We had to have a discussion about it and alleviate
> concerns and bring reasons. Which members of IGC and Bestbits( those who
> were interested and attended the calls and responded to survey) have been
> doing so.
>
> This is a great move for civil society to get its act together and not be
> fragmented. And the revival of IGC can happen too.
>
> Are there provisions in IGC charter about how to agree on starting charter
> amendments? If so then we can follow.
>
> As to your other points, I would not blame the co-coordinators for our own
> inactivity. Lets set IGC into motion then we can discuss strategy and what
> we should do. We don't even have a website now! We need to rebuild.
>

> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <
> governance at lists.riseup.net> wrote:
>
>> The IGC usually takes a poll led by elected co-coordinators to determine
>> consensus. If post discussion and debate, consensusnis reached to merge
>> then by all means.
>>
>> Nobody speaks for the IGC unless there is consensus, if you want to
>> change the Charter, then there is a process to follow. It is meant to
>> protect us. Members of Best Bits are members of the IGC anyway unless they
>> left or unsubscribed.
>>
>> One of the challenges, I have seen is the loss of important IGC data from
>> the old servers. Every organsiation has to evolve, advance but this has to
>> be based on consensus, and papers for and against, proper discussion and
>> debate. From the outset, all I have seen is a presumption where the IGC has
>> been forcibly roped into discussing mergers without the consensus.
>>
>> The co-coordinators have not set a strategic pathway for engagement in
>> key international fora as the IGC in the HLP session although I was to see
>> great geographical representation by some members of the IGC in the.forum
>> in their individual capacity.
>>
>> I would also like to see the IGC working with the World Economic Forum
>> etc and participating in the UN New York meetings, although some members
>> participate in their organisational capacity. It is also significant that
>> UNDESA reviews the global SDG projects and has a
>> monitoring/evaluation/audit type role which it uses to review and report
>> back to the UNGA.
>>
>> On another separate, note, whilst Arden (bless her heart), and others
>> have been royally pissed about making a dent in how global MNCs like
>> Facebook behave in crisis, these are not new issues as they are.similar to
>> historical discussion on the list about Brits imposing a temporary ban over
>> a certain radius of the London bombing just as the Egyptians and others
>> have done during times of national security. The Tech Accord which
>> represents the committment and negotiations between MNCs, Tech Giants and
>> some government reps as was shared by the former French Ambassador on Cyber
>> affairs and others, it is on a transcript at a main session from last year.
>>
>> The most New Zealand can do is impose a law in New Zealand against these
>> giants.  Facebook's Mia in NZ who is based in the Sydney officer and global
>> public policy counterparts have alot of work on their hands.
>>
>> One view is that the threat to freedom of expression (which the IGC has
>> always talked about is no respecter of whether you are from the East, West,
>> South, North. The principles are well established in International law and
>> Frank La Rue's report to the UN General Assembly which was endorsed is
>> relevant. On the other hand, threats that Jeremy Malcolm and others have
>> been raising on wordings and semantics on child pornography by a UN
>> Drafting.committee show an example of new and emergent threats.
>>
>> Personally, even if Arden takes it to the UN, the UN is obliged and
>> mandated not to duplicate work that is already done and to this end, the UN
>> Secretary General's foresight in appointing the HLP and launching the
>> report is key as geopolitical tensions are further heightened. I have yet
>> to read the full HLP report, but if it is missing a FoX compoment, then a
>> letter to the Co-Chairs, the UN Secretary General.may the faster non
>> bureaucratic way to get traction.
>>
>> What giants like Facebook would fear is being broken up for regulation!
>> Frankly Macron is hated in France just as Trump is hated in the US for
>> imposing taxes.
>>
>> It would be great for the IGC to host and convene a panel to explore
>> this. I would recommend Bertrand from Internet Jurisdiction to co
>> facilitate and moderate a geographically diverse panel and a representative
>> from the Geneva Internet Platform. I know Bertrand is speaking at a
>> European Court of Human Rights with others.
>>
>> We need to take a step back and reflect as a community how we want to
>> engage. We cannot be reactive and we have to stay ahead of the curve.
>>
>> 2.36am so best be getting back to bed.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Sala
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> ---
>> To unsubscribe: <mailto:igc-unsubscribe at lists.riseup.net>
>> List help: <https://riseup.net/lists>
>>
> --
> Farzaneh
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20190614/306fa48c/attachment.htm>