[discuss] /1net Steering/Coordination Commitee
S Moonesamy
sm+1net at elandsys.com
Sat Dec 21 04:58:22 UTC 2013
Hi Jeremy,
At 19:17 20-12-2013, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>In my opinion this is the source of a lot of the friction between
>the technical community and the other stakeholder groups. Few
>governments work on mailing lists. People whose culture places a
>high priority on the avoidance of interpersonal conflict don't work
>on mailing lists. People who don't speak English don't work on
>English language mailing lists. People without a technical
>background, but who have important insights from other disciplines
>to contribute to technical discussions, do not work on technical
>mailing lists. People who don't know that a mailing list exists or
>that participation on it is important to their interests don't work
>on mailing lists. That's a lot of people!
In my opinion the above are valid concerns. I don't have an answer
to the above concerns. In my opinion, trying to force the ways of a
group on other groups does not work well. It can be, as mentioned
above, a source of friction. That friction drives people away.
>So, having a mailing list that is open is not adequate to ensure the
>inclusiveness of a process, or that any concern that hasn't been
>voiced on that list are "not an important concern". To do that,
>much more proactive outreach and capacity building is needed. This
>takes time and expense. One of the most important roles of
>organised civil society is to seek to represent (in a loose sense)
>the perspectives of those who are unable to participate directly,
>but we are chronically underfunded and understaffed and we struggle
>to fulfil this responsibility. Speaking personally, I can't count
>on my fingers the number of technical committees that I think are
>important, where consumers are not represented, and where my
>organisation doesn't have the resources to represent them.
I am not sure whether I am part of civil society or not. I would not
argue that an open mailing list is inclusive. I prefer to look at it
this way: is it possible to hear any concern that has not been voiced
out? I do not think so. I may be wrong. If I have an important
concern, would I be able to discuss about it personally in the venue
where the decision is being taken? That depends on the barriers to
get to the venue. If I have an important concern, would my
representative (assuming I have one) discuss about it on my
behalf? I doubt that as the representative might have some other
concern which is more important than mine.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
More information about the discuss
mailing list