[discuss] /1net Steering/Coordination Commitee

Fri Dec 20 13:30:34 UTC 2013

Grande Carlos

On Dec 20, 2013, at 2:01 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> Hi people,
> 
> Writing as a member of the local organizing group (LOG): we are

Great, a new acronym to add to our lexicography, and one that invites all kinds of bad puns etc. as well :-)

> extremely worried because time is an independent variable and we badly
> need a clear definition from all stakeholders as soon as possible.
> 
> To CS: please forget about the other stakeholders (they have their own
> challenges and they will have to solve them). If CS is going to restart
> the infighting to define representing names, now on who will sit at the
> 1Net Steering Committee, instead of building upon the imperfect but
> reasonable process we managed to do so far, you will be pushing LOG into
> a corner as we have to define the committees ASAP.

+1, to put it mildly
> 
> LOG must have the two main committees (high level and executive)
> basically defined by the end of this year. My *personal suggestion* is:
> CS accepts for the 1Net Steering Committee the nominating group which we
> defined for the Icann HL meeting, as proposed now. We will of course be
> able to keep an eye on them as we usually do. And let CS try and define
> the 2-3 names for the HL committee and 2 names for the exec committee as
> soon as possible (before this year ends).

Could you perhaps clarify two points?

*You refer to CS' "2-3 names for the HL committee.”   Adiel’s initial 18 November message said it was "8 /1net Internet community representatives (senior executive level)” for the Multistakeholder High-Level Committee and " 6 governmental representatives, and 6 /1net community representatives” for the Multistakeholder Executive Committee.  Could you remind us what the desired mix of stakeholders is, and whether it’s just business/TC/CS or also academics (per the 1net coordination comm)?

*We’ve been told that the Multistakeholder High-Level Committee "will set the high-level political tone and objectives of the conference” while the Multistakeholder Executive Committee "owns the full responsibility of organizing the event, including: defining conference purpose/agenda,” etc.  I’m not entirely clear on the division of labor this implies, and whether different skill sets would be optimal…should the former indeed be senior executive level?

> 
> LOG agreed 1Net will be the conduit to send the names of all non-gov
> sectors to it, since there is representation of all sectors in their
> Steering Committee.

Thank you for clarifying this, as whether or not that’s the desired procedure has been the subject of a lot of excess cycles and drama.
> 
> BTW, in this (imperfect) way CS will be *far better* than the business
> community in terms of all balances. And please recall that the meeting
> is planned for about 1,000 participants, so plenty of space to come to
> SP and participate.
> 
> []s fraternos with eyes on the ticking clock…

Indeed.

Best,

Bill
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> On 12/20/2013 09:14 AM, Ian Peter wrote:
>> Well dear fellow multistakeholders,
>> 
>> Here is the state of play as we enter the holiday period.
>> 
>> Business community chooses the biggest and richest without thought for
>> balance.
>> 
>> Technical community needs more time to get the job done.
>> 
>> Academic community works hard on deciding what an academic is.
>> 
>> Civil society implodes.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> All sounds like business as usual to me (but maybe my cynicism will wear
>> off by morning).
>> 
>> 
>> I am not going to bore this list with a description of the civil society
>> processes that came up with a very good representative set of names. If
>> you want to know about the processes adopted, read the IGC or Best Bits
>> archives (or email me). Having worked with the various civil society
>> groups as an independent facilitator, I can tell you that the civil
>> society reps involved knew their processes were imperfect, had little or
>> no time to do anything about it, but ploughed ahead to come up with a
>> very good and widely accepted result.
>> 
>> Those chosen for civil society were selected for their capacity to
>> represent all of civil society, not just their own organisations, and to
>> work collegiately with other stakeholder groups. In a less talented
>> field perhaps Klaus or Michael, both of whom were candidates, might have
>> been chosen.
>> 
>> Anyway
>> 
>> All the best to you all and I look forward to some positive advances in
>> the new year!
>> 
>> Ian Peter
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

**********************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow & Lecturer
  Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
  University of Zurich, Switzerland
Chair, Noncommercial Users Constituency, 
  ICANN, www.ncuc.org
william.drake at uzh.ch (w), wjdrake at gmail.com (h),
  www.williamdrake.org
***********************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131220/6a1e91e6/attachment.html>