[discuss] /1net Steering/Coordination Commitee

[John Curran]

On Dec 20, 2013, at 5:25 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> 
>>> And here I thought the Civil Society nominating process was a
>>> relative model of democratic and inclusive ideals….
>>> 
>>> Greg Shatan
>> 
>> Relatively speaking? It was.
> 
> In regard to the nominations for the “High Level Panel” organized by
> ICANN, I agree with this assertion. For those nominations simply the
> only no alternative to a hurried ad hoc process was to do nothing at
> all. Under circumstances the process used was IMO reasonably good.
> 
> Michael's criticism however did not refer to this, but to the subsequent
> nomination process for civil society representatives on the 1net
> steering committee. That criticism is IMO valid; in that context it
> would have been possible to organize a much more credible process, for
> example the coordination group of major civil society networks could,
> instead of doing the selections themselves, have organized a proper
> NomCom process with a randomly selected NomCom similar to the kind of
> process that IGC has been using on the smaller scale of making
> nominations in the name of the IGC as described at
> http://igcaucus.org/nomcom-process . I have in fact seriously proposed
> that kind of approach, both at the Bali IGF workshop on MS selection
> processes (#127), and in the relevant email conversations both before
> and after the IGF, including within that coordination group of major
> civil society networks.

Norbert - 

Seating of an initial coordinating committee for 1net does not preclude use 
the approach you suggest in the future; in fact, I think it would be a very 
good idea for the 1net coordinating committee to review and set up more formal
processes for subsequent appointment; this might require inclusion of certain
mechanisms for the appointment processes used for community representatives 
(such as those reflected in the IGC NomCom process.)  Note - I actually don't
know if that is a good idea or not (do various community segments want to 
have process requirements placed on how they select their representatives?) 
but seems like an excellent follow-on discussion for a 1net coordinating 
committee to undertake after it handles some of the more immediate questions 
that are building up...

Much like the Internet itself, we should strive for incremental improvements 
over time, but not let that prevent operations in the present.

Thanks!
/John

Disclaimer:  My views alone.