[discuss] List announcement "robust governance in the digital age"
mg at telepresse.com
Mon Feb 10 10:13:03 UTC 2014
I did not join that list for the motives but for the topic. If there
is a way to make the support structure and mechanism of an MS
governance robust, whatever its topic, I am interested. I wish this
list to focus on institutional trends, antropobotic issues (i.e. what
concerns a men machines society as we develop them), mechanical
tools, IETF and parlementary experience, etc. outside of the narrow
considerations specific to the internet case, history, participants,
I am quite interested in having that list develop a theory and write
a general purpose BCP on the topic.
At 08:18 10/02/2014, David Cake wrote:
> While I've subscribed to this list as its creation seems a
> fait accompli, I have absolutely no idea why this topic was
> considered apparently off-topic for this (or other IG focussed)
> list(s), and I think the idea of narrowly focussed mailing lists
> for particular policy issues to be an extremely poor choice of
> strategy for facilitating effective and inclusive policy
> discussion. At best it runs the danger of limiting discussion to a
> small number of particularly engaged participants, removing the
> participation of those who might have significant contributions to
> make but are not sufficiently focussed on that issue to join a new
> mailing list. At worst, it focusses discussion on a self-selected
> group of participants who agree with the initial framing on the issue.
> FWIW, I'm joining this list particularly because I disagree
> with the framing presented by Michael Gurstein presented below, and
> believe that a discussion consisting only of those who agreed with
> that framing, but that could be plausibly presented as an outcome
> of the 1net community, would be counter-productive.
More information about the discuss