[discuss] [] FINAL VERSION OF THE DOCUMENT - FOR PRINTING

[joseph alhadeff]

I think we can all support the concept, now the question is how to go 
about it?
On 4/27/2014 10:40 AM, John Curran wrote:
> Marilyn -
>    I find your fourth suggestion particularly appealing, and would 
> definitely support
>    1NET maturing into a more organized, collaborative space in which 
> we can talk
>    about  "tough topics" (but in a civil manner... :-)
>
> /John
>
> Disclaimer:  My views alone.
>
> On Apr 27, 2014, at 9:25 AM, Marilyn Cade <marilynscade at hotmail.com 
> <mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> 1NET discuss has not yet found commonality of topics that brings 
>> together a coherent focus that brings in a wide diversity of 
>> contributors. That is a fact that we all want to move past, and we 
>> want, undoubtedly, to make 1NET discuss meaningful.
>>
>> So, my fourth proposal is that we strive to find subjects from 
>> NETmundial, establish different discussions, and strive to advance a 
>> multi stakeholder discussion that is civil, statesmanlike, and works 
>> to progress commonality where possible in various topics.
>>
>> The section for further work, under the Roadmap might be a place to 
>> start.
>>
>> But that will require some restraint from all: that will require 
>> civility in our posting, mutual respect, even when we disagree.
>>
>> When the IGF was first launched, civility was often lacking in 
>> exchanges. We had an immensely influential spirit guide -- Nitan -- 
>> who coached us, mentored us, and today, at the IGF, we do disagree, 
>> often quite strongly and passionately, but we are civil in the 
>> discourse, and in the disagreements.
>>
>> During NETmundial, a similar spirit emerged. With some defined topics 
>> that can benefit from a broad, civil discussion, respecting 
>> differences, about a broad range of topics.
>>
>> I hope to see the influence of this spirit into 1NET.
>>
>> All can benefit so much from thoughtful discussion, informed 
>> discussion, expression of different points of views.  But, I do have 
>> a criteria for whom I listen to, and I listen as much to CS, 
>> technical community, governments, as I listen to business: and that 
>> is fact based and civility, even in different and even passionately 
>> held views.  The benefit of 1NET is that I can listen to diverse 
>> voices, but I can't if it is only noise and hostility, and lack of 
>> substance and lack of organization of topics. That is because it 
>> comes across at static.
>>
>> this is not a criticism of anyone. It is an appeal.
>>
>> I made a statement during NETmundial: we can talk about tough topics, 
>> but not in a tough way.
>>
>> Recently, George Sadowsky has proposed some evolution of our 
>> discourse processes for 1NET.
>>
>> I too want to make 1NET a trusted space to talk about tough topics, 
>> but in a civil and mutually respectful manner. And with some 
>> organization so that participants can select where/which topics most 
>> engage them.
>>
>> If we do that, we will make 1NET a truly collaborative, and 
>> contributing to the broader discussions about IG evolution, and we 
>> will build on the spirit of NETmundial.
>>
>> And, we will draw so many more to post and contribute to 1NET.
>> Shall we try?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://1net-mail.1net.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20140427/91bafb73/attachment.html>